"Really it is a national disgrace that the only piece of gun-related legislation to come to a vote since Tucson was this legislation that would have enabled dangerous concealed carriers like Jared Loughner to carry their guns across state lines," Dennis Henigan, acting president, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence as quoted in the Huffington Post.
Wow, that sounds really bad – and it would be IF IT WERE TRUE. It is not. Henigan is LYING and he knows it. Jared Loughner DID NOT HAVE A CCW PERMIT. He was carrying his gun without one because he wanted to commit murder. Strangely, the lack of a permit did not stop him. I doubt that any law would have stopped him from carrying in another state either. While it is true that in theory he might have obtained one, he never tried. Had he done so, he likely would have been denied on the basis of his mental status and many police contacts. (Which should have resulted in a police ordered mental health evaluation – but for some reason no one ordered it.)
Why is this important? Because the bill only applies to people who have permits. Even if your home state – like Arizona – does not require one, you still must obtain one from your state of residence to carry in another state under this bill. Many states currently recognize each other’s permits and this is why Arizona still issues permits.
So, let’s apply Henigan’s reasoning to driver’s licenses. His reasoning would be as follows: States should not be required to recognize each other’s licenses because people without licenses, who don’t know how to drive, will be allowed to drive in other states and people will die. People from other states who have lost their licenses due to drunk driving will come to your state because of this law and will kill people. All of this will happen because your state will be required to recognize licenses from other states. Absurd, isn’t it?
His argument is more than absurd – it is completely BOGUS. It is built upon a lie.
Sadly, he is not the only one who is dishonest. Our friends at the Violence Policy Center have produced and maintained a website called: Concealed Carry Killers
I suggest that you go to this site. It seems very convincing. Shall issue concealed carry is killing lots of people and needs to be stopped. The only problem with this study is that it is, like Henigan’s statement, completely bogus. It’s full of deception.
First, their data is BOGUS
The entire "study" is based upon news reports. It is the height of hypocrisy for the VPC to base their entire study on news reports when they insist that news articles describing Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs) are worthless! The NRA has kept a database of news reports of these incidents - mostly from local news outlets - for over 40 years. The database now has many thousands, if not tens of thousands, of incidents in which a gun was used to stop crime and in many cases save lives. When pro-gun rights folks cite these articles, they are told that they are meaningless because they are just news reports. They are just “anecdotal incidents” and even though they far outnumber the incidents used in the VPC study, they need to be ignored. In other words, the VPC will use data from a source when it suits them, and condemn that same source when the data refutes their position.
But it’s worse than that. Much of their data is outright falsified.
On June 18, 2010 gun rights researcher John Lott published an analysis of the VPC data from one state – Florida - which has had shall issue CCW longer than any other state. John Lott actually looked into the news reports on the 20 cases the VPC citied. The results were devastating:
In fully 25% of the cases citied by VPC, the article they used as a source made no mention of a permit. In other words, these people were carrying their guns illegally. It was clearly dishonest to include these incidents – and the fact that they were included indicates that the VPC is either dishonest, extremely sloppy or both. The best explanation is that they wanted to “pad” their data.
In another 25% of the cases, no charges were brought, charges were dropped before trial or the shooter was found not guilty on grounds of self-defense. It is by no means uncommon for a CCW holder who is involved in a shooting to be arrested while the investigation proceeds. Often times law enforcement wants the DA to make the decision regarding justification. In 20% of the cases that the VPC lists as “CCW killings”, the shooter was never brought to trial – most likely because there was a strong case for self defense. In 5% of the cases (1 shooting) the shooter was brought to trial and found not guilty.
In other words fully 50% of the cases VPC used were BOGUS - because they were either justified shootings or shootings that would have happened even if no CCW permits were issued because the shooter did not have one.
15% were cases of negligent discharge resulting in death - it is unlikely that not issuing CCWs would prevent these cases. Additional safety training might help – but CCW holders already have more training than most gun owners. Indeed, although firearms accidents are exceedingly rare, training can never completely eliminate accidental or negligent discharges resulting in death. It should also be noted that even police officers are involved such incidents. Recently in my area an officer left his firearm within reach of his his 3 year old daughter. She was killed. He was not prosecuted. Here in California, had he not been an officer, he almost certainly would have been charged as these people in Florida were.
10% of cases were pending and the CCW holder was claiming self defense. This means that as much as 60% of the cases VPC cites may be either justified or not involve CCW holders at all.
In only 25% of the cases they cite was the shooter convicted of murder. Even in these cases, this proves nothing - because the kind of person who commits murder might very well decide to carry without a permit. Indeed, far more people are murdered by people carrying guns without permits. In fact, the number of people murdered by CCW holders is approximately .12% of total murders in Florida. Yet, VPC states they were correct to predict that “blood will run in the streets” as a result of shall issue CCWs.
Clearly the VPCs data (and indeed their whole case) is highly questionable.
The premise that CCW holders are dangerous is BOGUS
Indeed, CCW permit holders are extremely law abiding. In Louisiana 40,000 permits have been issued since 1996. In these 14 years exactly THREE have been revoked for criminal activity. That is a revocation rate of less than .001% in 14 years! In contrast, in 2006 .317% of New York City Police were arrested. This means that CCW holders in Louisiana are 300 times less likely to commit crimes then NYPD Officers! Yet any police officer can carry anywhere in the 50 states. Of course, the truth is that both groups are – as a whole – fine, upstanding and honest people who can be trusted with weapons.
In many locations where CCW holders are required to present their permits on contact with law enforcement a carry permit is called a “good guy card” by officers. Why? Because unlike most of the other people they meet in a day, these folks have had to pass a background check.
How many CCW holders commit murder? At the time of this writing there are 888,721 persons licensed to carry in Florida. The VPC "study" covered about 4 years when Lott did his study. This means that the annual rate of murders committed by CCW holders is about 1.25 per 100,000 permit holders per year. The number of people in the general population who commit murder in a given year is difficult to find - but the overall murder rate is 5-6 per 100,000 per year.
It can be inferred from this - allowing for multiple killings (and multiple killers per victim) - that the number of people in the general population who commit murder in a given year is at least 5 per 100,000. Therefore a CCW holder is about 4 times less likely to commit murder than the general population.
The VPC "study" is BOGUS because it presents only one side
Imagine that there is a new drug on the market. It kills 2 of every 100,000 people who take it. 10 of every 100,000 get sicker when they take it. Wow, why would such a drug be allowed on the market? Simple, the rest of the story is that this drug has a 75% success rate in curing pancreatic cancer. Now it's clear why the drug is on the market: The benefits far exceed the risks. If such a drug existed, it would be considered a miracle of modern science.
The VPC presents only one side of the equation - the number of people supposedly murdered by people with CCW permits. (Indeed this is a very common tactic in the anti-gun rights movement – along with the false and irrelevant “comparisons” of things such as justifiable homicides vs. murders and suicides. The real comparison is lives saved vs. lives lost.)
The display of numbers on their main page does not even mention the time frame that the numbers cover. Even more importantly, there is no effort to provide context by providing information on Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs) that either do not result in shots being fired (which comprise by far the greatest number), or where shots were fired and no one died, or where shots were fired and no charges were brought. WITHOUT THIS CONTEXT, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO JUDGE THE RISK OR THE VALUE OF SHALL ISSUE CCW PERMITTING. (Hint: There is a very good reason they never talk about the “upside” of CCWs – it does not help their case.)
So, what are the benefits of shall issue concealed carry? How can we judge them? Would not the best way be to examine what happens to murder and crime rates when a state passes shall issue concealed carry?
In the first year after shall issue CCW was in effect in Florida the homicide rate fell from 36% above the national average to 4% below, and remains below the national average as of the 2005 reporting period. That is a huge change that has been sustained for over 20 years. (Florida Department Of Justice 1988-2005 statistics.)
So maybe Florida is a fluke. What about other states?
In Texas, murder rates fell 50% faster than the national average in the year after their concealed carry law passed. Rape rates fell 93% faster in the first year after enactment, and 500% faster in the second. Assaults fell 250% faster in the second year. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, online database, reviewing Texas and U.S. violent crime from 1995-2001.)
Currently 41 states have “shall issue” CCW or do not require a permit. In every case, crime has dropped after enactment. Eliminating Wisconsin (that just passed a CCW law, and Vermont and Alaska (that have never required permits), that leaves us with 38 states that have a track record after passing shall issue CCW. The story has been the same in every state. Violent crime has dropped. If it was already dropping, it dropped even more steeply. In addition to the drop in crime (which benefits everyone – not just people with permits), in every state the dire predictions of blood in the streets has failed to materialize. That’s why not one of these 38 states has repealed their CCW laws.
When closely examined the VPCs "study" is revealed for what it is: Unreliable propaganda based upon lies. Sadly, this is the case with most gun control advocacy - it's based upon three things: Desperation, Distortion, and Deception
Note: 114 of NYPD's finest were arrested in '06. There are roughly 36000 NYPD officers. That works out to an arrest rate of 0.317%. Compare to Florida CWP holders getting in trouble @ a 0.02% (or even take the 0.06%) rate as previously mentioned. That is an order of magnitude different.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Why has so much of the media ignored this story? Why have many who have covered it failed to make the connection to gun control?
First, many “mainstream media” outlets, including CBS, NPR, CNN, the LA Times (which has provided extensive coverage), AP, and Fox News have provided coverage. Fox News has covered the story extensively – including two prime time specials. The Washington Times and The New York Post have also printed stories. Even the NY Times and the Washington Post have covered the story – very selectively.
Still, this story began in, and has largely been carried by, the “new media”. It began on the forum cleanupatf.org – where the first whistle blowing agents made contact with two members of the “gun rights media”, who eventually were able to get reporters from the wider media to cover the story. Examiner.com, The Daily Caller, C-Span, YouTube and many other online outlets have carried the bulk of the news on this scandal – often reporting breaking news ahead of outlets like Fox and CBS. Another new media angle on the story is that most of the coverage by local Arizona TV stations and newspapers (which has been extensive) is available nationwide via the Internet. The House Oversight Committee has posted many videos on their YouTube channel and even created their own website - www.FastAndFuriousInvestigation.com to get the word out. Of course, talk radio has been all over the story too.
From an historical perspective, one might say that this scandal marks the end of the mainstream media’s – or even big media’s – control of the news. Thirty years ago, this story would have been effectively bottled up by the lack of mainstream news coverage. Not so today – there are just too many outlets to block them all effectively.
Second, there is no doubt that this story is flat out being ignored by many media outlets. It has been over a year since CBS first ran a story on Fast and Furious on it’s evening national news program. Since then there have been several congressional hearings, AG Holder and the DOJ have been threatened with contempt of congress, a White House aide has been connected to the scandal, the Mexican government has demanded that those responsible be handed over to them for trail, and over 60 congressmen and senators have called for Holder to resign. Not to mention the fact that a Border Patrol Agent is dead, as are hundreds of Mexicans. Does this not sound a story worthy of coverage?
One would think so – but in the year since CBS because the first “mainstream media” outlet to cover this story, the NBC, CBS, and PBS evening news have run exactly ZERO STORIES on the scandal. In other words, if you are part of the ever-shrinking group of people who get their news from the networks evening newscasts you would not even know this story existed.
There are many reasons for this, so let’s look at them one by one.
Cultural bias. Consider the location of most of the media in this country. The vast majority of the “old media” (ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS – and well as the New York Times) is headquartered in one of two cities: New York and Washington. The mindset towards firearms in these two cities is 180 degrees out of sync with the rest of the country. Washington DC is desperately trying to hold on to a virtual handgun ban (by making ownership as difficult as possible) after loosing a statutory ban before the Supreme Court. New York has only recently had to back off of it’s “keep the average guy from owning a gun” $350.00 per year per gun “registration fee” in light of the same decision. The culture in these two cities – along with Chicago and San Francisco – is as anti-gun as it gets. The editors who decide what stories get printed or broadcast largely reflect the culture of the cities in which they live. Guns are seen as intrinsically bad and as a source of evil – rather than objects that can be used for good or evil. Therefore the Federal Gun Cops (the ATF or more correctly the BATFE) are seen as a force for good and the more restrictions on gun rights the better. It takes a great deal of personal integrity to overcome a cultural and political bias as strong as this one. Only one of the four networks has managed to summon up enough integrity to provide coverage. It really is sad.
Political Bias. We know from the Journal-list scandal, as well as the more recent leaks from “Media Matters”, that there is a very direct and unhealthy relationship between the administration and much of the mainstream media. Much of the media simply does not care about printing the truth, or doing their job of holding government accountable. They view their job as basically being the official PR department for the Obama administration. This too is very sad.
Denial. It’s hard to believe that this could possibly by true. These must be unsubstantiated right wing charges that can’t possibly be true. This scandal makes Watergate look like nothing. No one died in Watergate and Watergate did not involve committing an act of war against Mexico or any other nation. Yet it took a long time for the news media and the rest of the nation to believe that Nixon had covered up Watergate. Fast and Furious is even harder to accept – especially if one believes that President Obama was in the loop when the operation was planned (something that cannot be proven at this point).
Lack of knowledge. Most reporters are not familiar with firearms in general and the US civilian firearms market and culture in particular. Even those who have firearms knowledge are likely to have obtained it in the military – not as civilians. Most have never been to a civilian gun range. They know few if any gun owners. They have never experienced the gun culture. They have not spent time in gun shops, have never purchased a gun and have little idea what the process is like. They don’t know any gun dealers and have no idea what they are like – or how closely many are associated with law enforcement. Most of what they do “know” has come from gun control groups and is often flat out wrong.
Anti-gun rights agenda. A significant number of reporters simply are opposed to gun rights. Fast and Furious is turning into a disaster for gun control advocates – who simply want the story to go away. Many reporters and news organizations share the same goals.
It is indeed sad that Fast and Furious is so “under reported”, but as the links in the time line indicate, there has been enough coverage to keep the story alive. It’s not going to go away any time soon.
Another opinion can be found here.
Friday, February 17, 2012
How Could Fast And Furious Have Been Used To Promote Gun Control?
First of all, what follows is speculation based upon what we know at this point. Obviously, I believe it is reasonable speculation - but you will have to make up your own mind.
Clearly this is a failed operation - no matter what the goal was. It failed because it became known that US Border Patrol Agent Brain Terry was killed with one of the guns ATF shepherded over the border. This was the last straw for some very brave line ATF agents who worked with people in the gun rights community to make the facts concerning this operation public.
WHAT IF THE ABOVE NEVER HAPPENED? What if Brain Terry was never killed? What if the agents did as they were told and kept their mouths shut?
Clearly the operation would have continued to pump guns into Mexico, and ATF execs wold have continued to track their recovery at Mexican murder scenes. At some point ATF would drop the hammer. I believe that they would then have arrested the smugglers, the straw buyers, AND THE COOPERATING GUN DEALERS.
The administration would then say: "Here's the proof. 'Assault Rifles' are flowing from these evil gun dealers to cooperating smugglers and they are killing hundreds in Mexico" We need a ban on these guns NOW. They would have something they don't have now: "Proof".
But you say, "The gun dealers would make it clear that they were cooperating with the ATF". They might try, but consider these possibilities:
1) What are their lawyers going to tell them? Keep your mouth shut and let us defend you in court. Even if they did get word out, who is going to believe people facing hundreds of felony counts?
2) The mainstream media, which is vehemently opposed to gun rights, would have hyped the ATF/DOJ version of the facts relentlessly.
3) ATF and DOJ would have lots of time to destroy or alter records to cover their tracks. Do you really think that people who sent guns to Mexican criminals, knowing that they would be used to kill people, would not do this?
4) A trial would take years. Faced with "we can find no record of any cooperation agreements" as the response from DOJ - and perhaps a very generous plea deal in exchange for testifying against the smugglers - the gun dealers might plead guilty. If not, they might be convicted at trial. Even if they were found not guilty, it would still take years.
5) Armed with evidence that "thousands of Mexicans are dying because we don't have an Assault Weapons Ban" the push for new laws would begin. It would not take long to swing a few votes and get it to Obama's desk. No matter if it is unconstitutional, one more appointment to the Supreme Court will invalidate the 2nd Amendment anyway.
Goal achieved, new "Assault Weapons" ban passed.
Again, the above is speculation. What follows is fact:
1) Within weeks of taking office, the Obama administration began pushing for a new "Assault Weapons' ban. Both Sec. of State Clinton and AG Holder were involved. Almost immediately their case falls apart when their "90% lie" is exposed and 67 House Democrats send a letter to Holder telling him such a bill is DOA in the House. So, they were stopped by two things: Lack of public support and lack of solid proof that US guns from the retail market were fueling the violence in Mexico.
2) Almost immediately the Fast and Furious operation begins to pump gun from US gun shops into the hands of Mexican criminals. Every one of these guns has a paper trail leading directly back to a US retail outlet - something they obviously did not have in large numbers prior to this.
3) One might think that given what they have been caught doing, the administration would back off calls for more gun control - especially in an election year. Not so. This is what Eric Holder said before the US House Oversight Committee in February of 2012: "This administration has consistently favored the reinstitution of the assault weapons ban. It is something that we think was useful in the past with regard to the reduction that we’ve seen in crime, and certainly would have a positive impact on our relationship and the crime situation in Mexico."
In other words, he is still repeating the same lies with the same goals even after the administration was caught sending thousands of the very guns he wants to ban to Mexican cartels who used them to kill hundreds. He arrogance is amazing.
Wasn't Fast and Furious Just a Botched Sting Operation?
The short answer is ABSOLUTELY NOT.
As Agent Dodson testified before congress, "There is not a single rookie cop in the US who could not tell you this operation would not work."
The above statement sums it all up. Clearly not every sting operation is going to work. The fact that they do not work does not prove that they were not sting operations or that they never had a chance of working. To prove that Fast and Furious was not a sting operation one must prove that it could not work and that those who ordered it knew it would not work as a sting operation. It's a high bar to clear.
Sadly, Fast and Furious meets that standard. Up to the point when the guns reached the border, an argument could be made that the guns were being allowed to continue on their journey in order to arrest as many people as possible. Of course, that would have required watching or tracking the guns up to that point - which ATF agents were explicitly ordered not to do. Without the knowledge and cooperation of the Mexican authorities, once they crossed the border they were gone. The next time they would be heard from is when they turned up at a crime scene after being used by a cartel soldier. Any chance of arresting people ended at the border and line ATF Agents were ordered not to follow the guns even that far.
The way the program was structured, the only people who ATF could arrest were the straw purchasers and the people they sold guns to. Ultimately, these were the only people ATF did arrest. They could have arrested these people after one or two purchases - instead they allowed thousands of guns to be purchased and sent to Mexican (and American) criminals. They allowed one suspect to buy over 500 weapons. Why?
Why were the guns allowed over the border? That's the one million dollar question. Gun rights folks look at the results - lots of guns going from the US retail market to Mexican drug cartels THAT OTHERWISE WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN SOLD TO THE TRAFFICKERS and infer that the purpose was to justify gun control. So far, this is the only explanation that makes any sense at all - but it is a logical inference. It is also the opinion shared by some of the whistle blowing agents and the former head of DEA in Phoenix who was forced to lend some of his agents to the program.
It may be that the motive was not gun control - but the facts prove that it was not a sting operation. Absolutely no one has been able to explain how deliberately letting guns go to Mexican criminals advanced this purpose - even when asked under oath in front of congress.
Perhaps the greatest irony is that an earlier operation called "Wide Receiver" provides an excellent example of what a "botched sting operation" looks like. If you haven't already do so, please follow THIS LINK and read my comparison of the two operations.
Take a hard look at the facts. If you do that with an open mind, I am sure you will be convinced that there is no way Fast and Furious was any kind of a sting operation.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Does Fast and Furious prove we need new gun laws?
I've heard that "straw purchasers" aren't really punished - that it's like a traffic ticket. Democrats are calling Federal "gun trafficking" law. What laws are on the books now? What are the penalties?
First, anyone who buys or transfers a firearm at a US gun dealer is required to fill out an ATF Form 4473. There are several questions on the form, including “Are you the actual purchaser of this firearm?” This is aimed directly at “straw purchasing”. The form must be signed under penalty of perjury. The penalty for just one instance of lying on the form is up to FIVE YEARS in prison. This is what Democrats call “the same as a traffic ticket”. When one considers that most straw purchasers buy more than one gun and usually fill out more than one form, it’s really easy to effectively be looking at a virtual life sentence. How much more do they want?
What about the “trafficker” – the black market gun dealer? Well, if he ordered the straw buyer to go buy the guns and give him the money, he is guilt of conspiracy (felony), suborning perjury (felony – five years each offense) and “being in the business of selling firearms without a license” (another felony). If they take the gun over a state line and sell it, that’s another felony. It seems like we already have a lot of laws to use against “gun traffickers”.
What about smuggling over the border into Mexico? Well, to transport guns out of the county without a State Department license is – you guessed it – another felony. In fact, the ATF clearly violated this law in Fast and Furious. (Why do I believe they are going to skate on that?)
So is the problem that we do not have enough laws? I think not.
Meanwhile, according to this report, Federal gun prosecutions have been falling since Obama took office. In fact, if you look back to 1993 you will see that at the same time President Clinton was pushing gun control, prosecutions dropped. In fact the lowest number of prosecutions was under his watch. They were climbing as GW Bush took office and they continued to climb, peaking in 2005 when the Bush DOJ prosecuted more than twice as many gun crime cases as Clinton did in 1997. They dropped slightly in Bush’s last two years – and they have continued to drop under Obama. (Down 13% since he took office.)
A gun dealer once told me how it works – and as I look back over the last 40 years, I think he is right. Democrats back off on gun law prosecutions so they can argue more effectively for more laws. When Republicans are running the DOJ and ATF, they enforce they laws to make the point that we do not need new laws.
The last thing that the Obama administration should get out of this criminal enterprise is the new, restrictive gun laws this illegal operation was designed to obtain.
The Fast and Furious ATF Scandal
Main Page
Introduction
Introduction
As more evidence emerges, it appears more and more likely that high-ranking administration officials in both the Justice and State Departments not only lied to the American people, but also conspired to increase the number of US firearms being smuggled into Mexico. This week Wikileaks (certainly not a pro-gun group) released diplomatic cables exposing a whole other side to the scandal.
Shortly after President Obama took office in January 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton launched a coordinated effort to pass more gun control laws here in the U.S.. The justification? 90% of military style semi-automatic rifles used in the cartel wars in Mexico were bought in U.S. gun stores and smuggled across the boarder.
There was only one problem: It was all a big lie. We now know that not only did the Justice Department know that the 90% figure was inaccurate, the State Department knew where the bulk of the rifles were actually coming from: Central America and U.S. sales to the Mexican Military.
The current timeline of the scandal provides the strongest support yet for the theory that administration officials first lied about the source of Mexican crime guns and then set about trying to support that lie by increasing the number of guns “going south”.
Early 2009: High ranking members of the administration launch a major campaign to pass a new “Assault Weapons Ban” in the U.S.. Over and over they state that 90% of weapons recovered in Mexico come from U.S. gun shops.
It should be noted that the original 90% figure was developed BY BATFE under the Bush administration, as noted in a Feb 2008 press release. However, it was the Obama administration that used this figure in a 'full court press" aimed at passing a new "assault weapons" ban.
Almost immediately, the 90% figure is called into question. Eventually it becomes apparent that:
1) 90% of guns reported to the U.S. BATFE for tracing are found to have come from the U.S.. HOWEVER: ONLY ABOUT ONE IN FIVE GUNS RECOVERED IN MEXICO IS SUBMITTED FOR TRACING. Even the left leaning factcheck.org recognizes that the real figure is no more than 18%, not 90%.
2) The administration was also including any firearm come from the U.S. in its’ figures – including firearms sold to the Mexican military and diverted to the cartels. Information revealed by Wikileaks confirms that the State Department was well aware that large numbers of these weapons were ending up in the hands of the cartels – and BATFE would discover this when they ran the trace. Counting these guns as coming from U.S. gun shops was flat out dishonest.
3) Wikileaks now also confirms that at the time the “90% lie” was being sold to the U.S. public, Hillary Clinton’s own State Department knew that the majority of weapons (other than handguns) were actually coming from Central America, not the U.S. This would include the so-called “assault weapons” the administration was seeking to ban.
In short, there is now ample proof that one of the first things the new Obama administration did upon taking office was to use information they absolutely knew was false to attempt to pass new gun control laws.
Sadly, the story does not end there. It appears that the administration may have reacted to the exposure of their lie by trying to make it come true.
2009-2010
Early 2009: At virtually the same time: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) began ordering gun dealers to sell guns to suspected smugglers.
Early 2009 to late 2010: Instead of arresting the smugglers, ATF agents are ordered to watch as the guns are smuggled into Mexico. Over and over they beg for permission to stop the guns from going into Mexico – every time the order is the same; Stand down.
Late 2010: Reports of the policy begin to appear on the insider web forum cleanupatf.org.
December 14th 2010, just after 11:00pm: US Boarder Patrol Agent Brain Terry is killed with an AK-47 smuggled into Mexico with the help of ATF.
December 28th 2010: The first whistle-blowing agent makes contact with gun rights media reporters David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh. This first agent states that the program’s purpose was to increase the number of US guns recovered in Mexico in order to justify further gun control laws in the US and increase ATF’s budget.
Since then the story has grown in both the traditional and "new" media. Several congressional hearings have been held. It has become evident that the administration is stonewalling and covering up - even as more whistle blowers have come forward.
First the ATF tried to deny that any guns had been "walked" into Mexico. This proved to be a bad decision because the whistle blowing agents had keep lots of records.
Then the ATF tried to blame the gun dealers - but that didn't work because the gun dealers had covered themselves by keep notes, records and even audio recordings of agents ordering them to sell guns to people they otherwise never would have sold guns to.
At that point the Department of Justice supposedly opened its' own investigation. This bogus investigation has been used as an excuse to stonewall the congressional investigation. We know the investigation is bogus because not one person has been disciplined over a year later.
In spite of the administration's cover up, more very disturbing evidence has come to light over the past year. It has been established that agents were forbiden to track or interdict the shipments in any way. Several other agencies were forced to cooperate including DEA, FBI and ICE. ICE was ordered to allow guns to cross the border. It has been established that William Newell - the man running the operation - was in regular communication concerning the operation with a White House aide. Newell was also described as "giddy" and "elated" when he received information that guns ATF shepherded into Mexico were recovered at Mexican murder scenes. A map showing locations in Mexico where firearms from the program were recovered was prepared and distributed to DOJ executives. It has been established that the head of of the DOJ's criminal division, Lanny Breuer, knew about the information. Multiple memos describing the operation were sent to Attorney General Eric Holder - as much as a full year before he acknowledged knowing about the operation in testimony before congress. Furthermore, all of this was done without the knowledge or consent of the Mexican government. As this is written Rep. Issa is threatening to hold AG Holder in contempt of congress because he is refusing to turn over 80% plus of the documents congress has subpenaed.
This story is huge - and very hard to believe. I urge readers to follow the links to the news story archives and read at least some of the stories. You will see that it is not just the "gun media" or the "right wing media" that is covering the story. CBS News and the LA Times have done good work as well. The links also include videos of congressional testimony that supports all of the above.
It is worth noting that something ATF initially denied ever happened, now threatens the Attorney General and links have been established to the White House. Other than the great work done by CBS News and Fox News, the mainstream broadcast media is trying their best to ignore this scandal because it doesn’t fit their agenda. They can only do this for so long before they will have to report on it. Congressional hearings or a contempt charge may very well force their hand.
Of course, there is another possibility: President Obama could assert executive privilege to avoid handing over documents to the House investigation. The problem with do this is that it screams “cover up” and the many, many witness have provided copies of many documents. Even executive privilege will not stop this investigation.
June 21, 2012 – Well, things have come a long way since I wrote the summery above. The administration has not done anything to effectively deal with this scandal. 18 months after the story broke we still do not know who authorized this operation, what the purpose really was, no one has been punished (except the whistleblowers!), DOJ has admitted they wrote a false letter to Congress – and now, in order to avoid having to disclose documents that might answer these questions President Obama has asserted executive privilege. The result has been exactly what I thought it would be: Lots of attention has been drawn to this issue and NOW PEOPLE REALIZE THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS HIDING SOMETHING.
Unless the administration can come clean on this issue by somehow disclosing what they are withholding AND that evidence clears the administration of involvement in the both the operation and the cover up, THIS ISSUE WILL BE A HUGE INFLUENCE UPON THE COMING ELECTION.
June 28, 2012 - Today, for the first time in history, a sitting cabinet member was found to be in contempt of congress. 17 Democrats crossed party lines to vote in favor of the criminal contempt charge against AG Eric Holder. An even greater number - 21 - joined in the civil contempt action. In the hours leading up to the vote, the MSM and the administration joined in creating a great deal of disinformation - all of which can only be believed if one has not followed the story. Many of the "facts" in these articles have been contradicted not only by documents and the whistle blowers but but ATF, DOJ and other administration spokespersons as well.
Where does it go from here? The short answer is to the courts and to the voters. The generally acepted legal opinion is that Holder will loose and have to hand over everything the committee is asking for. Of course, this will be after the election. As for the voters - this will cost President Obama any votes he might have gotten from gun owners and their families. Some others will be asking the same question: What is he hiding?
Wide Receiver vs. Fast and Furious
Didn't this all start under Bush? Didn't he do the same thing? Didn't his "Wide Receiver" operation use the same tactics?
The short answer is ABSOLUTELY NOT. The longer and more accurate answer follows.
Under the Bush administration, several sting operations were conducted in which straw buyers were allowed to purchase guns and attempts were made to follow the guns to, and in some cases over, the border. The largest and most well known operation was called “Wide Receiver”. The other operations were similar. During these operations approximately 200-250 firearms “got away”. The fact that some guns did cross the border is the only similarity between the Bush era program and Fast and Furious.
Let’s compare the two programs:
Cooperation with Mexico:
Wide Receiver: Mexican Law Enforcement notified, Mexico consented and was a full partner.
Fast and Furious: Mexico intentionally kept in the dark. No coordination or consent.
Surveillance of Firearms:
Wide Receiver: Agents attempted to keep track of the guns at all times.
Fast and Furious: Agents were ordered not to track the guns after they were purchased.
Use of Tracking Devices:
Wide Receiver: Extensive – placed in every lot of guns purchased
Fast and Furious: One “agent built” device in one gun
Performance of Tracking Devices:
Wide Receiver: Smugglers figured out how to defeat trackers
Fast and Furious: Smugglers didn’t have to do anything
Number of Firearms Sent to Cartels:
Wide Receiver: About 250
Fast and Furious: Exact number unknown, but over 2,500
Actions at the Border:
Wide Receiver: Attempted to hand off surveillance to Mexican law enforcement
Fast and Furious: ATF worked with Customs to make sure guns were not stopped at border
Reaction to guns “getting away”:
Wide Receiver: Program terminated. William Newell wrote memo saying “never again”
Fast and Furious: Program continued – recovered guns tracked and mapped.
Ironically, Wide Receiver provides an excellent example of a truly “botched sting operation”. The purpose of the Bush era programs was to track the guns to and over the border where Mexican law enforcement would make arrests. It was poorly planned and executed – but it at least has some potential to work and serve a law enforcement purpose. Make no mistake – Wide Receiver should result in heads rolling – but the program was not designed to send guns to the cartels.
Another point: Since the Phoenix ATF had experience with this kind of operation, why would they think that a program with many less safeguards would ever work? Why was such an operation begun with months of President Obama taking office and immediately after their bogus numbers on US retail sourced guns going to Mexico were exposed as false? Sadly, the answer is obvious.
In contrast, Fast and Furious was designed to pump guns into Mexico, without the knowledge of the Mexican government. Without their knowledge and cooperation, their was no chance of making arrests as a result of allowing guns to cross the border. Therefore, there was no law enforcement purpose. It was designed and executed for the purpose of sending guns from US retail outlets to the cartels. It was not a “botched sting operation” – it was a correctly executed plan with a very evil purpose.
This begs the question: What was the purpose of sending these guns into Mexico, where they were used to kill hundreds of Mexicans?
If one looks at what this could accomplish, the only answer on the table is the same one named by both the whistle blowing agents and the former head of the Pheonix DEA office who was “in the loop”: The passage of new gun control laws in the US.
If you still think these operations were “the same” or “used the same tactics” – please follow the link below and listen to Eric Holder tell you that the two programs were not similar.
Nov. 8, 2011 - Sen. Cornyn Grills Holder on Wide Receiver vs Fast and Furious (Wide Receiver questioning starts at about 3:00)
The 70-90% Lie
Question: I have heard again and again that the vast majority of guns used by the Mexican cartels are purchased in US gun shops. How do we know this not true?
There are four reasons we know it’s not true:
First, we know it is not true because it doesn’t make sense.
Second, we know it’s not true because the argument for it is bogus – and when analyzed logically and correctly the evidence shows that it is not true.
Third, we have positive evidence that the guns are coming from other sources.
Fourth, US Gun Dealers Actively Work to Prevent Straw Purchases and Gun Trafficking.
So, let’s look at these reasons one at a time:
First, it just doesn’t make sense.
Cartels are not like most criminal organizations. They are huge – and they need to arm what are virtual armies. They have huge amounts of money. They control lots of land and lots land and coastline. They have many local police officials on their payrolls. Last of all, they smuggle things for a living.
Given the above facts, why would a cartel use the US retail market as a primary source of firearms? Consider what has to be done to procure one AK47 (a favorite cartel weapon) and convert it to fully automatic. First, a straw buyer must be found to buy the gun. He or she must then by no more than one or two guns at a time so as not to get reported by the gun dealer. The buyer must then pay a premium price (by world standards) of $450.00 – 750.00. Of course the straw buyer must be paid (usually about $100.00 - $200.00 per gun). So, let’s say that they spend $700.00 on each gun – and we will assume that they are able to smuggle the gun back over the border at no cost, since they are bringing drugs north and the same teams could transport guns south. But once they get the gun to their base in Mexico, they are not done. They still have to have their gunsmiths convert the rifle to fully automatic, which takes some time and effort.
In contrast, the going rate for a fully automatic AK47 on the Central American black market is $75.00. Central America is awash in weapons – including many supplied by the US – that were used in the wars back in the 1980’s. Then there is the possibility of buying new guns at wholesale from an overseas source – like China, North Korea or Iran. (China’s biggest arms maker is under a US ban for selling fully automatic AK47s directly to an LA street gang – so these countries, all of which produce AK47s in huge numbers – would certainly be happy to sell them to the cartels.) Getting these guns into the country is not hard for organizations that smuggle for a living. Then there are the internal sources – corrupt Mexican officials who are willing to order more guns than their police or military unit really needs in order to sell them to the cartels. Any of these sources are easier and cheaper than the US retail market. Why in the world would the cartels go through all that trouble when there are easier and cheaper sources available to them?
Second, the argument that the data shows that most cartels come from the retail market is bogus.
It is intentionally dishonest. The dishonestly begins with he carefully worded statement, “90% (or sometimes 70%) of crime guns recovered in Mexico and submitted to the ATF for tracing were made in or sourced through the US.” This statement, while technically correct, is intended to convey the message that these guns are coming from the US retail market. Politicians – up to and including President Obama – have presented it as such. As we shall see, this is not the case – and both the ATF and the administration know it.
The two underlined sections are key. The first one “and submitted to the ATF for tracing” is huge. Less than 30% of Mexican crime guns are submitted to ATF for tracing. Why would the Mexican government not submit a gun for tracing?
The most obvious reason would be that it is readily apparent that the gun is not from the US. How would Mexican authorities know this? The lack of a serial number would be a huge clue (they have been required by law on all guns made or imported into the US since 1969). Foreign markings on the receiver would also be a dead give away, since no foreign “Assault Weapons” can be imported to the US.
Other reasons that Mexico might not submit a gun to the ATF include the fact that it was taken to the cartels by a defecting police or military member, or that it was diverted or stolen from the Mexican military or police.
It is also clear that Mexico wants to blame the US for the violence in Mexico. They therefore have a strong motivation to “selectively submit” guns for tracing in order to blame the US. It is a logical to conclude that they pre-screen guns before sending the serial numbers to the ATF. Therefore the 90% figure is really an indication of how good the Mexican pre-screen of the guns is – not an indication that 90% of guns used in Mexico come from the US.
So, a hard look at the phrase “and submitted to the ATF for tracing” has reduced our number from 90% to approximately 27%. So that means that about 27% of cartel guns are coming from US gun shops, right?
Wrong. We have yet to examine the second of the ATF’s carefully chosen statement: “made in or sourced through the US”. What does that include? The short answer is just about any gun that has ever been in the US. It includes American guns sent to countries other than Mexico as military aid and those sold to countries other than Mexico for use by their police and military. If these show up in Mexico – as a result of the international black market – they are counted as “US sourced”. If a Mexican soldier or police officer is issued a US made weapon, and then defects to one of the cartels – or sells his weapon – or is killed and his weapon taken from him or her – that weapon would count if submitted for tracing. US made guns sold to the Mexican government for their police and military for use in fighting the cartels and some of them are diverted to one of the cartels if recovered and submitted, these would count as “US sourced” too. Ditto if the gun was legally exported to Mexico and sold for civilian use. Finally, in addition to all the preceding if the gun was purchased in a US gun store by a straw purchaser and smuggled over the border – this too counts as US sourced.
So, even when the gun actually does come from the US, being sold in a US gun shop and then smuggled in, is only one of many ways it may have gotten into Mexico. Is there any way for us to tell what percentage of guns traced back to the US come from Mexico? The answer is yes, ATF could easily research this, but for some reason ATF doesn’t want to go to the trouble of doing so – perhaps because it does not suit their agenda.
The only hint is what ATF calls the “time to crime” average. The “time to crime” is literally the time from first sale to recovery by law enforcement (US or otherwise). Organized purchasing in US gun stores, followed by a quick trip over the border logically should result in one of the quickest time to crime figures – a few weeks to a few years. Averaged out, given the crime rate in Mexico, it should average no more than 2-3 years. A much longer time would suggest that a high percentage of US sourced guns are used guns being sold to the cartels on the international black market. The average time to crime on US sourced guns in Mexico is 14 years – which is highly suggestive that the vast majority of cartel guns ARE NOT COMING FROM US GUN SHOPS, BUT FROM OTHER SOURCES.
So, what is the real figure? Realistic estimates range from 8-17% for guns coming from US retail sources and 30-40% for guns from any US source - a far cry from the bogus 70-90% promoted by the administration – a figure that even the left leaning organization factcheck.org says, “Based on the best evidence we can find so far, we conclude that the 90 percent claim made by the president and others in his administration lacks a basis in solid fact.”
Third, we have positive evidence that the majority of guns are coming from other sources.
The Central American Black Market: Ironically, State Department cables obtained and released by Wikileaks reveal that at the same time that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was claiming that 70-90% of Mexican crime guns were coming from US gun shops the US Ambassador to Mexico was submitting reports that indicated that the primary source of these guns was the Central American Black Market.
State Department direct sales program: This program allows foreign governments – including Mexico – to buy weapons directly from US manufacturers. Mexico is the largest user of this program, buying tens of thousands of weapons each year. A huge percentage of these firearms are diverted to the cartels through theft and corruption. The State Department finds itself in a Catch-22 situation because Mexico needs guns to fight the cartels – but many of the guns sold to Mexico actually end up in the hands of the people both we and the Mexicans are fighting.
Defecting Troops and Police: In recent years 150,000 members of the Mexican military and police have defected to the cartels. It is absurd to think that they would turn in their issued weapon before defecting. It’s a safe bet that most of these people took their government owned guns with them.
The Wider International Arms Market: According to Fox News, "Mexico is a virtual arms bazaar, with fragmentation grenades from South Korea, AK-47s from China, and shoulder-fired rocket launchers from Spain, Israel and former Soviet bloc manufacturers. Interpol says Russian Mafia groups such as Poldolskaya and Moscow-based Solntsevskaya are actively trafficking drugs and arms in Mexico. Chinese assault weapons and Korean explosives have been recovered in Mexico." The cartels want weapons and have billions of dollars to spend – as a result vendors from all over the world are actively selling guns to them.
Fourth, US Gun Dealers Actively Work to Prevent Straw Purchases and Gun Trafficking
The actions of gun dealers in Fast and Furious show that they are alert to straw purchasing and both refuse sales and contact law enforcement when they detect such activity.
To those of us who know gun dealers, the idea that a dealer would intentionally sell guns to smugglers is absurd. The abuse of guns by criminals threatens their livelihood. The most common previous career found among gun dealers and employees is law enforcement. Both on and of duty cops frequent gun shops. ATF works with the National Shooting Sports Foundation – the gun dealers and manufacturers trade organization – to train dealers and employees to spot and report straw purchasers. It works very well. As one ATF agent testified before congress, “Gun dealers are our friends – they make our cases.”
When dealers see indications of straw purchasing (such as buyer driving a beat up car buying a $2,000.00 rifle) they usually report this to the ATF while the purchaser is in the store. They also try to delay the suspicious buyer – for instance by telling him or her that there is a small problem with their background check that will be resolved in the next few minutes. They even have a name for it: The STALL and CALL. Prior to the Fast and Furious debacle, the usual ATF response was to detain the purchaser in question in the store or in the parking lot. They frequently would arrest them on the spot.
Even in cases where ATF did not ever show up, the vast majority of gun dealers are not going to risk their license and their business to sell one gun to someone they believe should not have a firearm. They simply refuse the sale.
The difference in Fast and Furious was that the gun dealers were ORDERED TO SELL THE GUNS. Gun dealers were extremely uncomfortable about this. They required the ATF to put their directions in writing. They recorded phone calls. Most of all, they expressed concern that the guns they were being ordered to sell would be used to kill innocent people. One dealer emailed the ATF exec in charge of the operation asking for reassurance that none of the guns going out of his shop would be allowed to remain in the hands of criminals or be allowed to cross the border. He said that he had friends in the Border Patrol and that he was concerned that these guns might be used against them. What response did he get? The ATF manager lied to him – saying that all of the guns were being intercepted and were not crossing the border. A few weeks later, Border Patrol Agent Brain Terry was killed with a gun from this man’s shop.
Indeed, Fast and Furious proves that large scale gun smuggling is not possible. These dealers detected the straw purchasers and called ATF. The problem was that instead of arresting these people, and “flipping” to take out the smugglers – they ordered the dealers to sell the guns. Not only that, they had the FBI “fix” the National Instant Check System (NICS) so prohibited persons would pass the background checks. If it were not for the ATF, the smugglers involved in Fast and Furious would never have been able to buy anywhere near the number of guns they needed to supply even a small percentage of the cartel’s needs.
Yet, what was ATF’s response? They blamed the dealers by issuing a possibly illegal regulation requiring dealers to report all multiple sales of semi-auto rifles within two weeks. Dealers are not the problem and ATF knows it. The problem is the ATF itself.
The bottom line is that the “river of guns” flowing from US gun shops to Mexico is no more than a small trickle. The 70-90% figure is intentionally misleading and definitely inaccurate.
In fact, if guns were outlawed in the US tomorrow the cartels would be able to start sending guns to the US within days. They would have another lucrative business.
References:
ATF Mexico Gun Statistics Flawed
U.S. Arming Mexican Cartels? - America's Third War: Firearms, explosives sold through State Department funneled to criminals
Legal U.S. gun sales to Mexico arming cartels
America's Third War: Is the U.S. Arming Mexican Cartels?
"Iron River of Guns" a Myth, STRATFOR Says
Factcheck.org: Counting Mexico’s Guns - President Obama says 90 percent of Mexico's recovered crime guns come from the U.S. That's not what the statistics show.
Mexico's President Cites Debunked Claim That Most Guns in Mexico Come From U.S.
NewsBrief: Mexico's Guns Smuggled From Central America, Says WikiLeaks
The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come From U.S.
Mexican cartels get heavy weapons from CentAm, U.S. cables say
Mexican Drug Guns Coming from Central America Not US Sources
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Fast and Furious Timeline and News Links - Feb. 2012
Feb. 1, 2012 - Fox News: Holder to testify at new 'Fast and Furious' hearing - Rep. Issa: Congress' patience with the attorney general not infinite - Melson gave extensive testimony - including that he believes Justice is trying to blame ATF for their OP. Issa: Evidence shows Justice was involved.
Feb. 1, 2012 - CBS News: Family of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry sues U.S. government
Feb. 1, 2012 - Fox News: Family of murdered Border Patrol agent files $25M suit against ATF
Feb. 1, 2012 - Examner.com: Holder Wednesday: Between the rock and the hard place
Feb. 1, 2012 - Examiner.com: 'Fatally Flawed' report has some flaws of its own
Feb. 1, 2012 - Arizona Daily Star: Partisan swipes over Fast and Furious precede Holder's testimony
Feb. 1, 2012 - KVOA.com: Agent Terry's family claim to sue for $25 million
Feb. 1, 2012 - LA Times: Slain border agent's family alleges lies over ATF gun program
Feb. 1, 2012 - CBS5AZ: Parents of slain border patrol agent sue DOJ
Feb. 1, 2012 - azcentral.com: Quayle wants 'Fast & Furious' special prosecutor
Feb 1, 2012 - NY Post: A failed ‘Fast and Furious’ whitewash
Feb. 1, 2012 - Newsday: Family of slain border agent files $25M claim
Feb. 1, 2012 - The Washington Post: Justice official says congressional deadline for more Fast and Furious documents ‘impossible to meet’
Feb. 2, 2012 - Business Week: Gun Operation Documents Weren’t Provided, U.S. Lawmaker Says
Feb. 2, 2012 - Fox News: Holder: No One Disciplined for 'Fast and Furious' Yet
Feb. 2, 2012 - Fox News: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the operation
Feb. 2, 2012 - Fox News: GOP report: Justice officials were on top of Fast and Furious
Feb. 2, 2012 - Fox News: AG Holder, Republicans square off over documents
Feb. 2, 2012 - Townhall.com: Fast and Furious: Holder Says No Attempt of a Coverup at DOJ
Feb. 2, 2012 - C-Span: AG Holder Testifies in Third Hearing on "Fast and Furious"
Feb. 2, 2012 - Rueters: U.S. Republicans, attorney general fight over gun sting
Feb. 2, 2012 - Washington Post: Issa tells AG that House panel will do what is necessary to get Justice Department documents
Feb. 2, 2012 - NPR: AG Holder, Republicans Square Off Over Documents
Feb. 2, 2012 - Hot Air.com: Holder to Issa: I’ll hold people accountable … for whistleblowing
Feb. 2, 2012 - Washington Times: Issa pushes Holder to produce documents or face contempt
Feb. 2, 2012 - Texas Insider: GOP Report: Justice Officials Were on Top of Fast and Furious
Feb. 2, 2012 - LA Times: House GOP threatens to hold Holder in contempt over Fast and Furious
Feb. 2, 2012 - CBS News: Holder: Fast and Furious "has become political"
Feb. 2, 2012 - The Daily Caller: Holder’s No. 2 in 2009: Gunwalking, Fast and Furious a ‘terrific idea’
Feb. 1, 2012 - Fox News: Holder: No cover-up in 'Fast and Furious,' no effort to hide details of the operation
Feb. 2, 2012 - Wall Street Journal: GOP Lawmakers Criticize Gun Probe
Feb. 2, 2012 - Big Government.com: Holder Hearings, Opening Salvo - Issa Goes For Jugular, Democrats Attempt Smoke Screen For Holder
Feb. 2, 2012 - AZ Capital Times: Justice, House GOP tangle over access to documents
Feb. 2, 2012 - Hot Air.com: Did DoJ approve “a different approach” to gunwalking in 2010?
Feb. 2, 2012 - Red State: The Fast and Furious Cover Up
Feb. 2, 2012 - Examiner.com: 'Gunwalking' documents shared by Issa prior to Holder hearing cite DOJ failures
Feb. 2, 2012 - LA Times: Lawmakers investigating gun scheme may cite Holder for contempt
Feb. 2, 2012 - The Daily Caller (Video): Gowdy repeats call for Holder to resign ‘the easy way,’ or be impeached ‘the hard way’
Feb. 2, 2012 - NY Times: Further Pressure on Holder Over Failed Gun Operation
Feb. 2, 2012 - KTAR: AG Holder, House Republicans clash over documents
Feb. 2, 2012 - The Washington Times: Holder faces wrath in Hill hearing - Contempt threat cited in gun probe
Feb. 2, 2012 - The Press Enterprise: CONGRESS: Sparks fly in Fast and Furious hearing
Feb. 2, 2012 - Cronkite News: House lawmakers accuse Holder of obstructing ‘Fast and Furious’ probe
Feb. 2, 2012 - Fox News (Opinion): The Department of Injustice
Feb. 2, 2012 - Middletown Press: Holder, House GOP panel face off over surrender of documents on 'Fast and Furious' program
Feb. 2, 2012 - The Washington Post: Attorney general, Republicans spar over ‘Fast and Furious’ at congressional hearing
Feb. 2, 2012 The Washington Examiner (Editorial): Holder should walk the plank on 'Fast and Furious'
Feb. 2, 2012 - Examiner.com: Holder didn’t know…but somebody did; the F&F ‘main justice’ problem
Feb. 2, 2012 - Investor's Business Daily (Editorial): Groundhog Day: Holder Repeats Fast And Furious Lies
Feb. 2, 2012 - Salt lake City Tribune: House GOP threatens to hold A.G. Holder in contempt over Operation Fast and Furious documents
Feb. 2, 2012 - Examiner.com: Emails May Reveal DOJ Foreknowledge Of Fast and Furious
Feb. 2, 2012 - msnbc.com: AG Holder, House Republicans clash over documents
Feb. 2, 2012 - msnbc.com: Republicans, attorney general fight over gun sting
Feb. 3, 2012 - philly.com: GOP presses Holder on gun probe
Feb. 3, 2012 - Newsroom America: Holder Denies DOJ Covered Up 'Fast and Furious' Operation
Feb. 3, 2012 - International Business Times: Fast and Furious ATF Scandal: Attorney General Holder Denies Knowledge of Gun Walking Program, States Firings, Charges Will Come
Feb. 3, 2012 - the fix: Fur Flies in Hearing on ATF's "Fast and Furious" Campaign
Feb. 3, 2012 - Human Events: Slain Border Patrol Agent Terry’s mom calls Eric Holder a "joke" and a "coward politician"
Feb. 3, 2012 - Examiner.com: Murdered border cop's mom blasts Holder; Others push for probe
Feb. 4, 2012 - The Weekly Standard: Slow and Infuriating
Feb. 4, 2012 - policymic: Fast and Furious: Attorney General Eric Holder Should Take Responsibility For Weapons Smuggling Op
Feb. 4, 2012 - gather.com: Disgusting Display by Attorney General Eric Holder
Feb. 4, 2012 - Fox News: DOJ withholding Fast and Furious information?
Feb. 5, 2012 - Press Release: DEMOCRAT BREAKS RANKS ON ‘FAST & FURIOUS’: CONGRESSMAN CALLS OUT ATTORNEY GENERAL’S ‘TROUBLING’ BEHAVIOR
Feb. 5, 2012 - Fox News: Fast and Furious: Holder in the hot seat
Feb. 5, 2012 - redandblack.com: Obama’s irresponsibility crosses border
Feb. 5, 2012 - Right Side News: Dump Holder
Feb. 5, 2012 - Sipsey Street Irregulars: Sipsey Street Exclusive: Deception Plan. The Gunwalker Conspiracy was not, and is not, primarily an ATF scandal, although you are meant to think it is.
Feb. 6, 2012 - I just found a memo from Issa and Grassley to the majority members of the Oversight Committee. Here is one of the concluding paragraphs: "ATF blames Main Justice for encouraging Fast and Furious. The Justice Department blames ATF and the Arizona U.S. Attorney’s Office for the use of misguided tactics. Those who were in a position at Main Justice to stop the program blame their staffs for not bringing issues regarding Fast and Furious to their attention. U.S. Attorney ’s Office personnel have either taken the Fifth Amendment and refuse d to discuss the issue with Congress , or have been estopped by the Justice Department from talking to Congress altogether. As the former ATF Acting Director testified in July 2011, it appears very clearly that the Department is circling the wagons to protect its political appointees."
Feb. 6, 2012 - Source: Gun Walking To Mexico Known Outside Of ATF - An ex-federal law enforcement agent says other agencies stopped gun shipments linked to Operation Fast & Furious. When they questioned it, they were told Arizona's U.S. Attorney was aware of it.
Feb. 6, 2012 - Big Government.com: Fast and Furious: Rep. Burton to Holder, 'There Are Things You Don't Want Us To See'
Feb. 6, 2012 - The Daily Caller: Former Tucson DEA head: Holder either knew of gun-walking, or was willfully unaware Quotes:
"I can only speak to the reporting, but people all the way up to the attorney general knew what was going on.”
"Newell had a gun control agenda behind his actions with Fast and Furious and other operations. “Whenever Bill would make those [anti-gun rights] statements [with inflated gun trafficking statistics], everyone would roll their eyes and say, ‘when is someone going to call him on this?’”
Feb. 6, 2012 - The Daily Caller: RNC chairman: Holder acting like he’s under an ‘air of indictment’
Feb. 8, 2012 - The National Review: American Guns and Mexican Violence - By Sen. John Cornyn
Feb. 8, 2012 - Media Research Center: MRC Study: ABC and NBC Anything But Fast and Furious On Gunwalking Scandal
Feb. 8, 2012 - FrontPageMag.com: Eric Holder and Operation Stonewall
Feb. 9, 2012 - examiner.com/Fox News: Where is Truth from DOJ? Sealed Wire Tap Applications in Operation Fast & Furious
Feb. 9, 2012 - examiner.com: Issa, Meehan, Grassley to Holder: Unseal Fast & Furious wiretap apps
Feb. 10, 2012 - Fox News: Former DEA chief says 3 other federal agencies knew about Operation Fast and Furious
Feb. 10, 2012 - Fox News: Is 'Fast and Furious' biggest cover-up since Watergate?
Feb. 10, 2012 Fox News: New questions about Justice's account of 'Fast and Furious'
Feb. 10, 2012 - lohud.com: House memo: Entire goal of Fast and Furious was a failure
Feb. 10, 2012 - ticklethewire.com: Ex-DEA Official Said Agents in Other Agencies Tried to Stop ATF’s Fast and Furious
Feb. 10, 2012 - CNN: Holder granted extra time to turn over 'Fast and Furious' documents
Feb. 10, 2012 - Tucson Citizen: House memo: Fast and Furious was a failure
Feb. 11, 2012 - World Net Daily: Boehner sabotaging Fast and Furious probe?
Feb. 11, 2012 - Big Government.com: Fast and Furious: Rep. Darrell Issa Blinks, No Contempt Charges for Holder
Feb. 11, 2012 - Hot Air.com: Sheriff Paul Babeu: Fast and Furious scandal is far from over Babeu: "Many of us, including me, feel that whoever made these decisions should be held criminally accountable because people have been murdered”
Feb. 11, 2012 - HotAir.com (video): Tina Korbe interviews Sheriff Paul Babeu (A must watch video! Babeu states that F&F was planned and executed in order to reduce gun rights.)
Feb. 11, 2012 - Examiner.com: Ex DEA head: At least 3 other agencies knew about Fast and Furious
Feb. 12, 2012 - The Greenville News: Answers needed about gun program
Feb. 13, 2012 - Canada Free Press: Is Speaker Boehner making a deal with the Obama Administration to stop Fast & Furious?
Feb. 13, 2012 - Investors Business Daily: Fast And Furious Gun Control Plot Was Widely Known
Feb. 13, 2012 - Examiner.com: Issa spokesperson denies Fast & Furious ‘sell-out’ rumor
Feb. 14, 2012 - TPM: Issa Signals Contempt Proceedings Against Holder Over Fast And Furious
Feb. 14, 2012 - Newsmax: Rep. Issa to Holder: Quit Stonewalling on Fast and Furious
Feb. 15, 2012 - The Brownsville Herald: ICE agent's parents look for answers
Feb. 15, 2012 - Examiner.com: It’s been a year since ICE Agent Zapata was killed in Mexico -RIP
Feb. 16, 2012 - Brenham Banner-Press: Napolitano testifies in ‘Fast and Furious’ gun probe
Feb. 16, 2012 - Human Events: Fast and Furious: Obama’s 2013 budget removes ban on gun-walking
Feb. 17, 2012 - Ammoland.com: Felipe Calderon & CNN Continue To Lie About Sources Of Drug Cartels Weapons
Feb. 18, 2012 - American Thinker: Project Gunrunner Wasn't Fast and Furious by Any Means (An excellent rebuttal of the "Bush did it too" lie.)
Feb. 21, 2012 - The Cypress Times: NAPOLITANO 'HOPES' ATF DID NOT MISLEAD DHS ABOUT FAST & FURIOUS
Feb. 21, 2012 - The Daily Caller: Feinstein challenger: Drop Fast & Furious gun-control agenda
Feb. 21, 2012 - The Narcophere: US Troops May Now Be Coping with Fast and Furious Fallout
Feb. 22, 2012 - Rep. McCaul Opens Investigation into DHS Partnership with ATF's Operation Gunrunner (Local News Video)
Feb. 22, 2012 - CBS News: Second gun used in ICE agent murder linked to ATF undercover operation
Feb. 22, 2012 - Examiner.com: CBS has new revelation in Zapata slaying, and Sen. Grassley is not happy
Feb. 23, 2012 - KPHO-TV: Cash, guns and ammo seized in Casa Grande (Possible connection with Fast and Furious and a cartel "rip crew".)
Feb. 23, 2012 - Human Events: Fast and Furious: Walked ATF guns found at Zapata crime scene - A second American fatality in the Obama Administration’s gun-walking program is confirmed.
Feb. 24, 2012 - American Thinker: Janet Napolitano Claims Ignorance in Second Gun Link to ICE Agent's Murder
Feb. 27, 2012 - Examiner.com: BREAKING: Issa, Grassley push Holder for answers in Zapata slaying
Feb. 27, 2012 - CBS News: Congressional investigators fault ATF's "irresponsible tactic" in ICE agent murder
Feb. 28, 2012 - HS Today: Republicans Question Tactics in ATF Operation Linked to Murder of ICE Agent
Feb. 28, 2012 - ticklethewire.com: Atty. Gen. Holder Defends the Way he Handled ATF’s Fast and Furious
Feb. 28, 2012 - YouTube/oversightandreform/Fox News: AG Holder, the Failure of Fast & Furious is Your Responsibility
Feb. 28, 2012 - The Hill: Holder would have 'modified' Fast and Furious gun-tracking operation
Feb. 28, 2012 - Politico: Eric Holder on the Hill faces friendlier fire
Feb. 29, 2012 - AZ Family.com (Video): New leader of ATF in Phoenix discusses 'Fast and Furious'
Feb. 29, 2012 - MainJustice: Grassley, Issa Press Holder on Zapata Killing
Feb. 29, 2012 - HotAir.com: Holder: I’m the guy who stopped Fast & Furious
Feb. 29, 2012 - American Thinker: Gun Walking Caused Death of ICE Agent Zapata
Feb. 29, 2012 - BigGovernment.com: Fast and Furious: Another Straw-Purchaser, Another Federal Agent Dead (and Still Holder Won't Comply)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)