To answer Mike Hashimoto, the DMN’s editorial writer, no.  That, however, hasn’t kept them from sticking with their stonewall strategy:

What we still don’t know — what Attorney General Eric Holder with great determination will not say — is who in Washington signed off on this awful idea of letting straw purchasers cart off armloads of high-powered weapons, headed to Mexico. The stated plan was to track them to the cartels, which worked out about as well as one might expect. Hundreds of guns disappeared and now are turning up at crime scenes on both sides of the border.

Holder last week had another bob-and-weave session with a congressional committee, managing to reveal as little as possible. However, he did let us know that while Justice did dump hundreds of emails in response to a subpoena, none were addressed to him or had been sent by him. And that he has a personal email account, along with his government account. And that lying isn’t the same as not telling the truth, depending on one’s “state of mind.”

You’ve seen people who did it and didn’t in your life. Is this how an innocent person behaves? Is it plausible that the attorney general of the United States had no idea what was going on in Arizona within his own shifting time parameters?

No, and hell, no, respectively.  I recall when it came to light that Karl Rove, who wasn’t a Cabinet secretary or running federal law enforcement for the US, used his personal e-mail account while working on George W. Bush’s political team in the White House.  Democrats clutched hankies and swooned at the lack of transparency.  Now the Attorney General of the United States has suggested that his personal e-mail account might have been used to bypass transparency, and that there are thousands of communications that he will flat-out not share with Congress on the matter of Operation Fast and Furious, which a year ago resulted in the death of a US Border Patrol agent and perhaps hundreds of murders in Mexico. Have the same Democrats demanded transparency of the Obama administration?  No, and hell no.

Hashimoto holds onto some faint optimism that the scandal will drive Holder out of the way:

At some point, one might think, Holder becomes more of a liability to the Obama re-election campaign than a 50-50 incumbent can stand. At the very least, I can’t imagine congressional Republicans letting this drop, and the longer Holder stonewalls, the longer his name — and connection to his boss — stays in the news.

At first, I thought the same thing.  After all, one of the key duties of a Cabinet secretary is to fall on one’s sword when scandal erupts, in order to buffer the boss from the political fallout.  At this late date, I don’t think Holder will exit at all, unless so many Democrats start calling for his ouster that Barack Obama has to worry about Holder getting impeached. Obama would have to get Senate confirmation on a replacement for Holder in the case of resignation, and I think Obama is worried what that might mean, especially in an election year.  The only way he’d get a relatively painless confirmation from the Senate would be if he nominated a reformer Republicans could trust to get to the bottom of a number of issues of Holder’s tenure, and Obama clearly doesn’t want to make that any easier for Republicans than it is now.

Will the family of Brian Terry get the justice they seek?

In a statement released through attorney Pat McGroder, the family said it was “incomprehensible that members of ATF and DOJ would embark on such an egregious operation and then try to conceal the link between this failed investigation and Brian’s murder.

“We now believe that, if it can be shown that laws were broken, then all those responsible for Fast and Furious should be held criminally liable.”

The answer to that is also no, at least as long as Eric Holder remains Attorney General and refuses to fully cooperate with Congress.