Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

posted at 12:01 pm on June 25, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

The big question from last week’s assertion of executive privilege by Barack Obama was what, exactly, was so troublesome that the White House couldn’t have Attorney General Eric Holder release it.  It certainly wasn’t to protect the precedent of confidentiality of presidential advice; Obama and Holder have insisted that the President had no knowledge of Operation Fast and Furious until it made the headlines. Even the assertion of privilege attempted to skirt that issue by relying on deliberative process rather than direct presidential privilege, although it seems almost certain that deliberative process won’t shield Holder and others at executive agencies.  Clearly, the documents showsomethingObama finds damaging — but what is it?

Rep. Darrell Issa has headed the Congressional probe as House Oversight chair, and he told Jake Tapper yesterday that he thinks that the entire operation was political.  Tapper sounded skeptical, and Issa responds by pointing to Holder’s actions after the scandal broke:

video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

TAPPER:  You really think that there’s a possibility that they were sending guns across the border not because they were trying to get people in the Mexican drug cartels, not because they were trying to figure out drug — I mean, gun trafficking, but because they were trying to push gun control?

ISSA:  Two things quickly.  First of all, this was so flawed that you can’t believe they expected to actually get criminal prosecutions as a result of it.  So the level of flaw — flaw — flaw, if that’s a word, here is huge.

But here’s the real answer as to gun control.  We have e-mail from people involved in this that are talking about using what they’re finding here to support the — basically assault weapons ban or greater reporting.

So chicken or egg?  We don’t know which came first; we probably never will.  We do know that during this — this Fast and Furious operation, there were e-mails in which they’re saying we can use this as part of additional reporting or things like assault weapons ban.  So the people involved saw the benefit of what — what they were gathering.  Whether or not that was their original purpose, we probably will never know.

And I — and I take people at their word that this started off in some way as an idea where they could get good information, they could, in fact, roll up bad guys.  But after it was out of control and people are saying, we’re letting too many guns walk, those kinds of e-mails occurred, we — we have people who also were being opportunists.

And, remember, Eric Holder issued a four-state  reporting for long rifles and used what he had had here.  Right in the middle of the scandal, he issues that for four states.  They never needed this information.  They never needed the reporting to get this information.  These federally licensed gun dealers came to ATF and told them they had straw-buyers, told them they had suspicious buyers, and turned them on to the very people.  And one of these people bought over 700 weapons, just one straw-buyer.

So it’s very clear the system was working, where ATF was getting information voluntarily from licensed gun dealers.  They don’t need the additional reporting, but they got it anyway, and they used gun violence to the border and this operation as part of it.  So I think when you look at the chicken or egg, there’s proof that they certainly were opportunist.

Holder’s orders might be a chicken-egg issue as well.  After the scandal broke, the DoJ may have wanted a way to frame the issue as one of gun control rather than incompetence.  As Issa says, the entire structure of the ATF operation was so poor that it’s hard to see how anyone could have expected to get convictions in court from the results.  Is that more incompetence, or an indication that the DoJ wasn’t really interested in convictions?  That’s the big question, and one that Issa wants answered — from the documents that Obama is currently hiding behind a very weak claim of executive privilege.

Bill Whittle argued passionately that the only rational motive for Operation Fast and Furious was to push gun control, but Paul Mirengoff at Power Line is a little skeptical, too:

First, Fast and Furious does not appear to have been the brainchild of President Obama or Attorney General Holder. Rather, the program reportedly was formulated by the ATF in Phoenix in response to an edict from Washington to focus on eliminating arms trafficking networks, as opposed to capturing low-level buyers, as had occurred under traditional interdiction programs. If Fast and Furious had been the product of a conspiracy by the administration to promote gun control legislation, the program would have come from the top down, not from the bottom up.

Now, it’s possible that a thorough review of documents would show that, contrary to current understanding, the plan originated in the White House or with Eric Holder. But it seems unlikely. For if this had happened, those who have been blamed for the program would likely have said they were following edicts from the highest reaches of the government.

Eric Holder’s claim that he knew nothing about Fast and Furious is implausible. But this doesn’t mean that he and/or the president came up with the idea. As far as I know, there is no evidence as of now that either did.

Second, Obama and Holder probably would not have believed that increased violence in Mexico could lead to tougher regulation of guns in the U.S. Americans simply don’t care enough about Mexico to alter domestic policy based on what occurs there, especially when it comes to an issue as passionately and endlessly argued as gun control. Americans view violence in Mexico the way they viewed violence in Colombia – unfortunate, typical, and not our problem at any fundamental level.

I’m not so sure.  First, I recall the effort by administration officials, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to claim that Mexican gun violence was our problem by using falsely inflated figures of American origins of drug-cartel guns.  I wrote about the mythmaking in April 2009, long before the Fast and Furious  scandal got exposed (and before the operation had even begun).  I warned what the outcome of this claim would be at the time:

So why make up the lie? The more conspiratorial will conclude that the Obama administration wants to have a pretext for seizing weapons. Public statements like those made by Hillary Clinton certainly put pressure on the US to take some sort of action, if we’re admitting to being the problem. So far, the Obama administration has not proposed a solution to this mythical problem, but we will want to keep a very close eye when they do.

I don’t think Issa’s suggestion is far-fetched at all.  And at this point, it’s incumbent on the President and his staff to release all of the documents on this deadly program so that we can find out exactly who knew what, when they knew it, and why the Obama administration responded to this supposed problem by flooding Mexico with guns they didn’t bother to track.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

I kinda think so.

Electrongod on June 25, 2012 at 12:02 PM

Rachel Maddow will not be pleased with these statements. Not pleased at all.

steebo77 on June 25, 2012 at 12:02 PM

This has been a good day week. It has seen the end of Kenobi Holder, and will soon see the end of the Rebellion Obama.

pseudonominus on June 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM

This president is as low as bottom feeders in the deep Atlantic, he is capable of anything other than doing something good for the American people.

NoDonkey on June 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Two words: Valerie Jarrett

Dollar to do-nuts her name comes up a lot in those emails.

Weight of Glory on June 25, 2012 at 12:06 PM

This president is as low as bottom feeders in the deep Atlantic, he is capable of anything other than doing something good for the American people.

NoDonkey on June 25, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Obama can see Bin Laden from his current position.

Electrongod on June 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

Ya think?

bernzright777 on June 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Obama also hinted that behind the scenes gun control schemes would come about when he responded to a supporter. I know someone can find the quote.

SirGawain on June 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

It was, which makes it the worst offense against America from the White House ever in our history, by miles. Barky and his junta all must be held accountable for their assault on America to the fullest extent of the law.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 25, 2012 at 12:10 PM

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

Archivarix: Two plus two might be four, unless the Supreme Court rules otherwise.

Archivarix on June 25, 2012 at 12:10 PM

I think this was an effort to create a mass casualty event in the US as a trophy to gain gun control.

You don’t give machine guns to mad killers and expect anything less than lunacy.

kurtzz3 on June 25, 2012 at 12:11 PM

If it wasn’t gun control, IT must really be something major bho and his whole team was involved in?

I am happy the SC waited till Thursday to deal with bhocare. Let Issa/house do their thing with contempt charges against holder Wednesday, then drop the bomb on bhocare Thursday! Another bad week for bho could be coming?
L

letget on June 25, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Obama also hinted that behind the scenes gun control schemes would come about when he responded to a supporter. I know someone can find the quote.

SirGawain on June 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM

He told Mrs. Brady that he was working on something “under the radar…”

lovingmyUSA on June 25, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Obama also hinted that behind the scenes gun control schemes would come about when he responded to a supporter. I know someone can find the quote.

SirGawain on June 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM

I’d love to find the quote, but I think he said it either to Sara Brady herself, or someone else with the Brady Bunch.

bernzright777 on June 25, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Ya think?

bernzright777 on June 25, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Nailed that one. The obtuseness of some people’s cognitive powers is breathtaking. Especially so on our team.

God better help us because we are completely unable to help ourselves even a little bit.

platypus on June 25, 2012 at 12:13 PM

I’m not so sure. First, I recall the effort by administration officials, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to claim that Mexican gun violence was our problem by using falsely inflated figures of American origins of drug-cartel guns.

Yes! Thank you for bringing this up. Issa did a good job. I hope he and others around him make the same point.

Dongemaharu on June 25, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Liberal heads all scream in unison “IT IS A PARANOID CONSPIRACY THEORY!!!”

CorporatePiggy on June 25, 2012 at 12:14 PM

Think back to 2009, when all we heard from the president, from Holder, from Sec of State Clinton, from Sec. Napolitano, and from testimony at Congressional hearings, was how “90% of the guns confiscated in Mexico originated from the US.” Although this number was proven to be highly inaccurate, it didn’t matter. That was their mantra. They were setting this up as a reason for tougher gun laws. I have no doubt.

Then look at the emails from BATFE to local agents asking for “anecdotal evidence” that they could use to prepare “Demand Letter 3″. This letter is what forced FFL holders in border states to report multiple long gun sales.

So yes – they were setting up the “guns are bad, and guns are flowing into Mexico” argument, and then using the straw sales that they PERMITTED to occur as rationale for enacting Demand Letter 3.

Very transparent, indeed!

Hill60 on June 25, 2012 at 12:14 PM

It certainly wasn’t to protect the precedent of confidentiality of presidential advice; Obama and Holder have insisted that the President had no knowledge of Operation Fast and Furious until it made the headlines.

Obama and Holder may have been lying.

itsnotaboutme on June 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM

I don’t think Issa’s suggestion is far-fetched at all. And at this point, it’s incumbent on the President and his staff to release all of the documents on this deadly program so that we can find out exactly who knew what, when they knew it, and why the Obama administration responded to this supposed problem by flooding Mexico with guns they didn’t bother to track.

Which is why Congress should not be deal-making with Holder and go ahead holding him in contempt. It was bad enough that the nation’s highest law enforcement officer personally decided not to prosecute the New Black Panthers for intimidating white voters. It is bad enough that he and Obama choose which laws they plan to enforce and which laws will be ignored. But the appearance of Fast and Furious makes Watergate look clean in comparison. Nixon left office because the cover-up was worse than the crime. Holder and Obama are trying to cover-up a crime that is even worse than the whitewash.

Happy Nomad on June 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

Wellllllll, let’s look at some facts.

Washington Post April 11, 2011

On March 30, 2011 the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, Jim Brady, who sustained a debilitating head wound in the attack, and his wife, Sarah, came to Capitol Hill to push for a ban on the controversial “large magazines.” Brady, for whom the law requiring background checks on handgun purchasers is named, then met with White House press secretary Jay Carney. During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.

“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

Documents: ATF used “Fast and Furious” to make the case for gun regulations

On Jan. 4, 2011, as ATF prepared a press conference to announce arrests in Fast and Furious, Newell saw it as “(A)nother time to address Multiple Sale on Long Guns issue.” And a day after the press conference, Chait emailed Newell: “Bill–well done yesterday… (I)n light of our request for Demand letter 3, this case could be a strong supporting factor if we can determine how many multiple sales of long guns occurred during the course of this case.

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM

I don’t think Issa’s suggestion is far-fetched at all. And at this point, it’s incumbent on the President and his staff to release all of the documents on this deadly program so that we can find out exactly who knew what, when they knew it, and why the Obama administration responded to this supposed problem by flooding Mexico with guns they didn’t bother to track.

When did hotair turn into WND? F&F has turned Ed crazy.

red_herring on June 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM

OK, real simple, you have said it was not your idea and you possess the documents–you simply reveal the content in its entirety to make your case and we conservatives will be forever shamed.

Didn’t think so.

hillsoftx on June 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Remember when the Dems were all saying that 90% of all the guns in Mexico were coming from the USA..? How did that happen?

d1carter on June 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Why hasn’t Calderone lit his hair on fire about this? You say he didn’t know about it? Strange, he’s been very vocal about the U.S. needing stricter gun laws.

a capella on June 25, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

…TWO guns had tracking devices out of a couple of thousand or so!…DUhhhhhhhhhhhhhh…!!!

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 12:20 PM

It’s easy to clear up the confusion…just release the information Congress is asking for.

If they don’t, you can assume anything, and it’s all fair game. With he stonewalling they are the ones raising suspicion. You don’t hide good news from congress and the people, not this administration.

right2bright on June 25, 2012 at 12:20 PM

I buy Whittles narrative. Of course with Dems, we won’t know what’s in it, until we read it. Whatever it is, as usual, the cover up will be the part that leaves a mark.

Bmore on June 25, 2012 at 12:20 PM

NO……WAAAAAYYYYYY……

Dude’s been choomin……

KMC1 on June 25, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Eric Holder should ALREADY be in jail, and Obozo should be facing impeachment for this travesty!

KMC1 on June 25, 2012 at 12:22 PM

First, I recall the effort by administration officials, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to claim that Mexican gun violence was our problem by using falsely inflated figures of American origins of drug-cartel guns. I wrote about the mythmaking in April 2009, long before the Fast and Furious scandal got exposed (and before the operation had even begun).

Exactly. Even if the ATF in Phoenix initially formulated the plan, without the explicit knowledge of Holder or Obama (and I’m not sure I buy that, but whatever), that’s not to say the ATF in Phoenix didn’t have a pretty good idea of what the administration wanted. Aren’t the emails from ATF officials a pretty good indication that ATF knew what was needed to push gun control? Isn’t it likely the ATF in Phoenix is of the same mindset?

mbs on June 25, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

If you’re paying attention, it still is. Talking points are out that these weapons were only a “small percentage” of the guns in Mexico and “most” of the guns come from the US. They’re still trying to use this to push the false premise that guns from the US are the problem in Mexico.

Lost in Jersey on June 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Rather, the program reportedly was formulated by the ATF in Phoenix in response to an edict from Washington to focus on eliminating arms trafficking networks, as opposed to capturing low-level buyers, as had occurred under traditional interdiction programs.


Kevin McCarthy at National Review Online has already completely dismantled this argument.
If you look at the details it is not just operationally implausible, but near impossible for it to have occurred this way given the Federal structure in place.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on June 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM

I just read that Katie Pavlich reports that the man who shot Agent Terry was an FBI informant. Anyone know more?

flyfisher on June 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Why hasn’t Calderone lit his hair on fire about this? You say he didn’t know about it? Strange, he’s been very vocal about the U.S. needing stricter gun laws.

a capella on June 25, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Mexican president scatters blame far and wide for ‘Fast and Furious’ mistakes

Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s visit to Washington last week featured his usual lecturing of Americans about gun control. This time, he had some good ideas, although he remains wedded to many bad ones, too. A polite guest, Mr. Calderon did not mention the “Fast and Furious” operation during his public events with President Obama. But reports indicate that he did bring it up privately, and he was furious – justifiably so.

Mexican attorney general: “Obama more involved in Fast & Furious than admitted!”

In a statement released by Mexican Attorney General Marisela Morales, she called Operation Fast and Furious “an attack on Mexicans’ security.”

Morales told Mexican reporters that she is demanding a full and honest explanation from the United States government especially since evidence is being gathered that reveals the Obama administration was more involved in Operation Fast and Furious than top officials admitted in their sworn statements.

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM

*Oops, my bad, I meant Andrew McCarthy at NRO.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on June 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM

KOOLAID2 on June 25, 2012 at 12:20 PM

If you’re talking about the two guns found at Agent Terry’s murder scene – they didn’t have “tracking devices.”

They, like all firearms, had serial numbers, which were traced back to the gun shop in Phoenix.

Hill60 on June 25, 2012 at 12:27 PM

I have no idea, but I do know that you guys come up with really cool names for your fake scandals.

crr6 on July 10, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Del Dolemonte on June 25, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Has the vote for contempt been scheduled yet?

Night Owl on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

If they get all the documents and there’s no evidence that this was about gun control its going to look really bad for the GOP. Assuming anyone starts to care about this story at all.

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Holder and Barry needed a paper trail,…guns found at crime scenes with serial numbers from U.S. gundealers. The deaths of two U.S. LEOs screwed that. I might add, these guns will now be in the system forever and will be used to commit crimes in this country as well as Mexico. I think the documents under EP are a lot more explosive than simply trying to avoid embarrassment. This needs followthrough in spite of Nov. election results.

a capella on June 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Hillary would have been involved heavily since it was clandestine acts of war, international mass murder, oh yeah and sedition but she didn’t need to be involved in that last leg of the unholy trinity comprising F&F. She had a lackey at the meetings were F&F was discussed, I read from a link on an earlier thread I’m too lazy to hunt down.

Akzed on June 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Never let an incompetent sting operation go to waste…

PatriotRider on June 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM

I just read that Katie Pavlich reports that the man who shot Agent Terry was an FBI informant. Anyone know more?

flyfisher on June 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM

EXCLUSIVE: Third Gun Linked to ‘Fast and Furious’ Identified at Border Agent’s Murder Scene

A third gun linked to “Operation Fast and Furious” was found at the murder scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, new documents obtained exclusively by Fox News suggest, contradicting earlier assertions by federal agencies that police found only two weapons tied to the federal government’s now infamous gun interdiction scandal.

Sources say emails support their contention that the FBI concealed evidence to protect a confidential informant. Sources close to the Terry case say the FBI informant works inside a major Mexican cartel and provided the money to obtain the weapons used to kill Terry.

Unlike the two AK-style assault weapons found at the scene, the third weapon could more easily be linked to the informant. To prevent that from happening, sources say, the third gun “disappeared.”

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM

F&F could not possibly be to stop the flow of weapons to bad Mexicans….because the Feds SOLD THEM BY THE TRUCKLOAD to the Mexican military…hell the armories probably never even unpacked them before handing them out to the cartels!

Look if you are multi-million dollar drug op, do you send 1 guy dozens of times to buy rifles at RETAIL??? in AZ and TX???
WTF, if one my underlings did that I’d shoot him myself.

No a big op like those, buys weapons by the shipload from Africa, where an AK47 is $10 and a case of ammo is $20.

NOTHING about what the ATF says, or the DOJ says makes any sense at all, UNLESS its all about undermining the Constitution.

And THATs TREASON.

orbitalair on June 25, 2012 at 12:30 PM

I really never understood this whole deal from the start. They were letting guns go to Drug cartel criminals, in a foreign country- (while not working with officials in Mexico ) knowing these guns would be used to kill people, just to trace some type of flow through the drug cartel?

Why not just arrest the cartel guys for Drug trafficking in the first place?

One at a time.

FlaMurph on June 25, 2012 at 12:30 PM

If they get all the documents and there’s no evidence that this was about gun control its going to look really bad for the GOP.

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

No, if O’bama wanted to embarrass the GOP, he would release them all to do so immediately. He didn’t.

What are he and Holder hiding?

Del Dolemonte on June 25, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Has the vote for contempt been scheduled yet?

Night Owl on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

It is on the schedule to begin debate on the House floor for Wednesday.

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:31 PM

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM | Delete | Delete and Ban

Probably not.

a capella on June 25, 2012 at 12:31 PM

I just read that Katie Pavlich reports that the man who shot Agent Terry was an FBI informant. Anyone know more?

flyfisher on June 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Here’s her 45 minute interview on CSPAN where she talks about this.

Dongemaharu on June 25, 2012 at 12:32 PM

I just read that Katie Pavlich reports that the man who shot Agent Terry was an FBI informant. Anyone know more?

flyfisher on June 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM

A third gun linked to “Operation Fast and Furious” was found at the murder scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, new documents obtained exclusively by Fox News suggest, contradicting earlier assertions by federal agencies that police found only two weapons tied to the federal government’s now infamous gun interdiction scandal.
Sources say emails support their contention that the FBI concealed evidence to protect a confidential informant. Sources close to the Terry case say the FBI informant works inside a major Mexican cartel and provided the money to obtain the weapons used to kill Terry.
Unlike the two AK-style assault weapons found at the scene, the third weapon could more easily be linked to the informant. To prevent that from happening, sources say, the third gun “disappeared.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/09/exclusive-third-gun-linked-to-fast-and-furious-identified-at-border-agents/#ixzz1yp5rOuha

Hill60 on June 25, 2012 at 12:33 PM

I think Issa has documents that provide incontrovertible evidence of the WH using F&F to go after gun ownership, supplied by an insider.

Issa needs to get those documents through a legitimate and public process to make sure the information remains credible, and not subject to a “Lucy Ramirez” taint.

BobMbx on June 25, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Simply unreal

flyfisher on June 25, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Dang – you’re good! Beat me to it.

Hill60 on June 25, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Dec. 15, 2010, the day Agent Terry was murdered, ATF was leaking the names of gun shops and their owners suspected of complicity in gun running to the NYT.

You know, the same federally licensed firearms dealers who thought they were cooperating with ATF by selling guns to straw buyers under the watchful eye of los federales.

Akzed on June 25, 2012 at 12:35 PM

What is this liberal meme, that Issa isn’t “negotiating” for the documents in good faith?

Why should he negotiate for documents he’s legally entitled to? There is zero legitimate reasons to withhold even a single document from congress.

Rebar on June 25, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Trial in case of slain border agent is postponed

TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) — A judge has postponed the trial of two men accused of fatally shooting a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

The Arizona Daily Star (http://bit.ly/Jzhb00) reports a U.S. District Court judge is delaying a June trial date, according to court records.

Records show the date will be reset based on a request from the court and defense attorneys.

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Here’s her 45 minute interview on CSPAN where she talks about this.

Dongemaharu on June 25, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Excellent!

flyfisher on June 25, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Bill Whittle -> Rep. Darrell Issa -> (Next?)

Axe on June 25, 2012 at 12:36 PM

A few years ago Democrats submitted a bill to control the sale of ‘missiles’. the real purpose of the bill, however, was found (lickily) tucked away inside the bill – it attempted to define BULLETS as ‘missiles’. Rather than successfully ban every type of gun they have wanted to for years, which they have been unable to do, they attempted to ban the amunition that they would require. Having all the weapons you want but having no ammunition to go in them would have evidently sufficed. The bill did not pass once the attempt/plot was uncovered.

Now we have a President who has repeatedly demonstrated a total disregard for the Contitution, the Rule of Law, and his own oath of Office, that he is willing to do whatever he wants to pass & institute his agenda. That obviously includes his agenda to eventually outlaw weapons. there is a great book out right now that chronicles the steps/events leading up to and through Fats & Furious, with quite a few ‘insiders’ on record.

The major lamestream media has done their best to downplay ‘Fast & Furious’ and this book. Any serious mention of it has resulted in labeling the book as a ‘Conspiracy theory’, but so far what HAS been reported follows along perfectly with the book. The media, as of today, continues to try to downplay the importance of this failed program, calling it inconsequential, a ‘minor program’, and a ‘waste of our time’. According to this administration the illegal sale/flow of thousands of weapons, to include handgrenades, the deaths of approx 300 people – to include Americans, 3 counts of Felony Perjury by THE Attorney General, & now the mis-use of Executive Privilege to cover this entire story up is a ‘small matter’ that ‘wastes our time’.

With all the DOCUMENTED Constitutional Violations, CRIMES (Felonies), the refusal to enforce certain U.S. Laws, and continued protection of law breakers…$CREW ‘Contempt’ Charges – They need to begin IMPEACHMENT investigations/preparations/Proceedings!

easyt65 on June 25, 2012 at 12:36 PM

One thing is startling clear: F&F was designed to kill hundreds if not thousands of people.

pat on June 25, 2012 at 12:37 PM

It’s easy to clear up the confusion…just release the information Congress is asking for.

If they don’t, you can assume anything, and it’s all fair game. With he stonewalling they are the ones raising suspicion. You don’t hide good news from congress and the people, not this administration.

I just don’t understand….it was a program launched by the Bush Admin and continued under Obama’s, after all, so why has EP been invoked to protect Bush’s role in this entire botched operation and ensuing scandal? You’d think Obama would want to immediately expose Bush’s role in this as proof that Obama, nor anyone in his admin, had absolutely nothing to do with this shameful and criminal act.

/sarc


“Guns Don’t Kill People – Drug Cartels Armed By Our Government Kill People”

hawkeye54 on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

If they get all the documents and there’s no evidence that this was about gun control its going to look really bad for the GOP. Assuming anyone starts to care about this story at all.

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Yeah, I’m sure that is why they won’t release the documents, they don’t want to embarrass the GOP. Your stupidity is funny.

Night Owl on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Hill60 on June 25, 2012 at 12:33 PM

Accomplices before and after the fact…

Akzed on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

…I don’t think Issa’s suggestion is far-fetched at all. And at this point, it’s incumbent on the President and his staff to release all of the documents on this deadly program…
posted at 12:01 pm on June 25, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Ed,
Fine that you don’t see this as ‘far-fetched at all’, but there is nothing to support such a theory beyond imagining sinister motives. As is typical of how this stuff gets played out in conspiracy theories, you feel it’s incumbent on Obama and the administration to to provide ‘documents’ that prove your suggestion false, wile you/others offer no documentation or evidence at all.
‘I have a wild speculation…prove I’m wrong.’
Thanks for cutting to the chase here.
And did the Bush admin have the same objective with the gun walking that happened on their watch?
Or did they just happen to essentially do the same thing for completely different reasons?

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

I have no idea, but I do know that you guys come up with really cool names for your fake scandals. crr6 on July 10, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Del Dolemonte on June 25, 2012 at 12:27 PM

As far as getting old goes, this never does.

Akzed on June 25, 2012 at 12:39 PM

If they get all the documents and there’s no evidence that this was about gun control its going to look really bad for the GOP. Assuming anyone starts to care about this story at all.

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

If that is so, then why aren’t they releasing the documents?

It won’t look bad for the GOP. If Issa’s surmising that a political motive may have been behind this turns out to be wrong, why is that “bad for the GOP”?

He’s making reasonable inferences based on the information uncovered thus far – and is prudently and reasonably seeking more information to determine what exactly occurred here and why. If his early conjecture turns out to be wrong based on later evidence, where is this great harm to the GOP.

Instead, it is delusional fantasy on the left that somehow the public is going to decide that this very reasonable and justified investigation is somehow improper that is going to make the DNC look very, very bad.

if there is nothing in the hidden documents, then the public will say “why didn’t they just turn those documents over instead of wasting everyone’s time?”

Or, in the likelier scenario where the documents contain damaging information, the public will say – “oh, I see whey they didn’t want to release that”.

Either way, it hurts dems.

Monkeytoe on June 25, 2012 at 12:39 PM

I’ve seen a lot of misinformed ppl saying machine guns or assault weapons, wrong, these were semi automatic weapons sold over the counter. A assault weapon has the capability of firing full auto. The guns weren’t capable of full auto, and if they were the administration is in a heap more trouble than we think……….

angrymike on June 25, 2012 at 12:41 PM

It is on the schedule to begin debate on the House floor for Wednesday.

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:31 PM

Thanks!

Night Owl on June 25, 2012 at 12:41 PM

If they get all the documents and there’s no evidence that this was about gun control its going to look really bad for the GOP. Assuming anyone starts to care about this story at all.

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

So sending thousands of firearms into the hands of the cartels isn’t bad enough?

Or the murder of two Federal Agents – and hundreds of innocent Mexican civilians?

Gun control issue aside – this operation was a failure and resulted in the murder of innocents. Shouldn’t we look into how something like this was allowed to occur? If it was initiated at the local level, and Holder and Obama had no knowledge – then so be it. Just turn over the documents that substantiate that and we’ll go after the chief at the local office. (You know, the one that was promoted, and now works in D.C.)

Hill60 on June 25, 2012 at 12:41 PM

Second, Obama and Holder probably would not have believed that increased violence in Mexico could lead to tougher regulation of guns in the U.S. Americans simply don’t care enough about Mexico to alter domestic policy based on what occurs there, especially when it comes to an issue as passionately and endlessly argued as gun control.

Americans will care if there is violence on our southern border with Americans being killed. I believe this administration would gladly trade the deaths of a few of what they might call rednecks for the political leverage of tightening gun control laws. The whole liberal agenda is predicated on progressively limiting the liberty of Americans. Maybe that agenda goes dormant when Republicans are in power. And even when Republicans are in power nothing of any real significance happens to reverse the trend. The establishment Republicans are like valets. They keep the motor of the parked progressive limosine idling until the Democrats come back into power and once in power off they drive again leaving tire marks on what is left of our freedom.

DaveDief on June 25, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

Gee, ya think?

Big John on June 25, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Fine that you don’t see this as ‘far-fetched at all’, but there is nothing to support such a theory beyond imagining sinister motives. As is typical of how this stuff gets played out in conspiracy theories, you feel it’s incumbent on Obama and the administration to to provide ‘documents’ that prove your suggestion false, wile you/others offer no documentation or evidence at all.
‘I have a wild speculation…prove I’m wrong.’
Thanks for cutting to the chase here.
And did the Bush admin have the same objective with the gun walking that happened on their watch?
Or did they just happen to essentially do the same thing for completely different reasons?

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Once again verbalace jumps on with his asinine theory that Congress must prove a crime before it cannot investigate anything.

You truly are a complete moron.

we are all, including Issa, speculating as to motive here. But, that once again for you idiots on the left, has no bearing on whether the investigation is justified. The congressional investigation is extremely well justified based on the facts that we know.

And no, congress does not have to prove Holder or Obama is guilty of anything before beginning an investigation. Good lord, I am amazed you can remember how to breath in and out.

Monkeytoe on June 25, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Thanks for cutting to the chase here.
And did the Bush admin have the same objective with the gun walking that happened on their watch?
Or did they just happen to essentially do the same thing for completely different reasons?

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

I see you still haven’t read up on this issue, but you continue to comment. I’m sort of embarrassed for you.

Night Owl on June 25, 2012 at 12:44 PM

If they get all the documents and there’s no evidence that this was about gun control its going to look really bad for the GOP. Assuming anyone starts to care about this story at all.

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

No, because the operation was still stupid and illegal, itself, as well as the cover-up. The idea that the Executive branch was further using this whole insane strategy to undermine Americans’ Constitutional rights is just a further aggravating circumstance on top of an already out-of-control illegal operation.

But there already are documents in public where the ATF discussed using their own insane and illegal operation to push for gun control. That is not in question. Whether that was the original motivation is the only open question on this.

Leftists don’t care about tyranny so there’s little question that you or your America-hating ilk are ever going to care. You idiots want “America, Fundamentally Deformed” so your opinions about anything don’t really matter. We know you hate America. That’s no secret.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 25, 2012 at 12:44 PM

I really never understood this whole deal from the start. They were letting guns go to Drug cartel criminals, in a foreign country- (while not working with officials in Mexico ) knowing these guns would be used to kill people, just to trace some type of flow through the drug cartel?

Why not just arrest the cartel guys for Drug trafficking in the first place?

One at a time.

FlaMurph on June 25, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Because the sole purpose of Fast and Furious wasn’t to arrest the cartels, it was to put American guns in the hands of the cartels that killed people to support the Dem’s claim that 90% of guns used in Mexican crimes come from the U.S. thereby garnering support from the American people for stronger gun control.

Flora Duh on June 25, 2012 at 12:44 PM

And did the Bush admin have the same objective with the gun walking that happened on their watch?
Or did they just happen to essentially do the same thing for completely different reasons?

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

By all means – I am more than happy to investigate back into what was done in these programs during Bush’s tenure. If they were acting as incompetently as Obama’s ATF/Justice, then it should also be investigated.

Of course, the reality is, based on everything that has been reported thus far, that Operation Wide Receiver was performed differently than F&F. In OWR, they actually, you know, attempted to interdict the buyers/sellers before the guns got to Mexico, whereas in F&F, they were purposefully not doing that.

But, as always, don’t let facts get in the way of your argument that a) Bush did it too and b) it was Bush’s fault.

Monkeytoe on June 25, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Fine that you don’t see this as ‘far-fetched at all’, but there is nothing to support such a theory beyond imagining sinister motives. As is typical of how this stuff gets played out in conspiracy theories, you feel it’s incumbent on Obama and the administration to to provide ‘documents’ that prove your suggestion false, wile you/others offer no documentation or evidence at all.

It’s not to prove anything false, it’s to assist in an investigation. You’re “logic” would apply to police executing a search warrant.

‘I have a wild speculation…prove I’m wrong.’

No. We have motive and probable cause, and we need additional information likely held by key players in our investigation. If to prove a bet I were looking for pictures of elephants in your wedding album, would you withhold it if there were no pictures of elephants, or show everyone the album to win the bet?

Thanks for cutting to the chase here. And did the Bush admin have the same objective with the gun walking that happened on their watch? Or did they just happen to essentially do the same thing for completely different reasons? verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

The Bush admin’s Operation Wide Receiver was done with the full cooperation of the Mexican govt, did not purposefully let guns walk but arrested those involved, involved many fewer weapons, and when guns did get lost it was shut down. So, nice try.

Akzed on June 25, 2012 at 12:46 PM

If they get all the documents and there’s no evidence that this was about gun control its going to look really bad for the GOP.

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

No. It won’t change anything.
They’ll just conclude and preach that it was a ‘successful coverup’.
And in the blogs we’ll hear the pages that would have revealed all were on the back of Obama’s college transcripts, and thus destroyed.

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Tancredo isn’t shy about point his finger right at Hillary

And the Hillary connection might explain the little stuttering crook going Full Nixon in an attempt to cover it all up.

MNHawk on June 25, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Two words: Valerie Jarrett

Dollar to do-nuts her name comes up a lot in those emails.

Weight of Glory on June 25, 2012 at 12:06 PM

The force is strong with this one…

peski on June 25, 2012 at 12:47 PM

When did hotair turn into WND? F&F has turned Ed crazy.

red_herring on June 25, 2012 at 12:16 PM

lol

What reasonable explanation can you provide for why the F&F guns would be allowed to walk w/o being tracked?

If you cannot give one, why don’t you make yourself look more intelligent, and shut up until you do give one?

Bizarro No. 1 on June 25, 2012 at 12:47 PM

It’s not like it hasn’t been suggested over the years that American guns are Mexico’s biggest problem. They stopped saying it when it turned out to be a liberal American administration purposefully being the supplier.

Cindy Munford on June 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM

And did the Bush admin have the same objective with the gun walking that happened on their watch?

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Awww, how cute. Our little leftist piece of garbage is passing along talking points of a woman who thinks astronauts landed on Mars.

You’s really kind of dumb boy, you know?

MNHawk on June 25, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Kevin McCarthy at National Review Online has already completely dismantled this argument. If you look at the details it is not just operationally implausible, but near impossible for it to have occurred this way given the Federal structure in place.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on June 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Cause you just know that Colonels and Captains have unlimited access to personnel and funds to run an op. that the Four star Generals/Admirals know nothing about.

arnold ziffel on June 25, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Couple things:

Rather, the program reportedly was formulated by the ATF in Phoenix in response to an edict from Washington to focus on eliminating arms trafficking networks, as opposed to capturing low-level buyers, as had occurred under traditional interdiction programs. If Fast and Furious had been the product of a conspiracy by the administration to promote gun control legislation, the program would have come from the top down, not from the bottom up.

Why would it have to come from the top down? Are we to assume that the director of the ATF, or regional/field office directors of the AFT are all staunch supporters of the 2nd amendment and would require a direct order from above to promote an anti-2nd amendment agenda through operational tactics? According to Katie Pavlich’s book, many in the ATF are frustrated at the political nature of those placed in charge of these divisions. Increased gun control is a platform on the Democratic agenda and has been for decades. Why would anyone preclude this as a motive behind F&F?

Secondly, if this was a plan to eventually effect arrests, the guns would have to be traced. They were not. There was no tracking mechanism in this operation. The guns were sold to straw purchasers upon facilitation of the ATF and never seen again until they showed up on crime scenes. No one knew where, exactly they went and no effort was made to prevent them from leaving the country. How is that a law enforcement operation?

BKeyser on June 25, 2012 at 12:50 PM

And did the Bush admin have the same objective with the gun walking that happened on their watch?

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Day after day you amaze, turd bird.

arnold ziffel on June 25, 2012 at 12:50 PM

And in the blogs we’ll hear the pages that would have revealed all were on the back of Obama’s college transcripts, and thus destroyed.

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:46 PM

funny – I like the sly reference to the fact that Obama won’t release any true information about his past – like his college transcripts.

There are always conspiracy theorists on the blogs, and you will find just as many on the left blogs (truthers, koch brothers, etc).

Assuming that the documents are ever released and contain absolutely nothing damaging to Holder or Obama, most people will admit it and move on.

Indeed, let’s see the documents so we can resolve all this and move on. I’m all for that. Unfortunately, the WH and Holder, not so much.

Monkeytoe on June 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM

Once again verbalace jumps on with his asinine theory that Congress must prove a crime before it cannot investigate anything.

Monkeytoe on June 25, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Aside from the fact that nothing in what I just wrote says that, I have also in the past specifically acknowledged congress need not have any proof at all to start or pursue an investigation.
But by all means, argue from a false premise.

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM

“Who authorized F&F?”

For sure it wasn’t the “local ATF office”.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on June 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM

No. It won’t change anything.
They’ll just conclude and preach that it was a ‘successful coverup’.
And in the blogs we’ll hear the pages that would have revealed all were on the back of Obama’s college transcripts, and thus destroyed.

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:46 PM

You and libfreeordie continue to shamelessly commit logical fallacies, hack.

Unlike hypocritical, whiny, lip-service-only partisans like you you, some of us do actually care to give the Terrys the closure they want & deserve…

Bizarro No. 1 on June 25, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Issa: Fast and Furious might have been a political operation to push for gun control

.
.
.
*Ahem* DUH!

a5minmajor on June 25, 2012 at 12:52 PM

But, as always, don’t let facts get in the way of your argument that a) Bush did it too and b) it was Bush’s fault.

Monkeytoe on June 25, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Can you re-read what I wrote, and try to avoid knee jerk cliches?
No?
Well, ok.

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:53 PM

For the Clueless that get their “news” (i.e. leftist propaganda) from the socialist media and therefore know NOTHING about Fast & Furious:

Summary of Fast & Furious (F&F): a program of the OBOZO regime that was designed to manipulate public opinion so they could destroy the Second Amendment freedoms of Americans to own guns. A key element of this despicable plan was to allow mexican drug cartels to gain free access to purchase guns and rifles in the US (principally, Arizona) and then, after the guns had been used in horrific crimes by the cartels, to sway US public opinion (with help from the d-cRAT stooges and puppets in the socialist media) against such “easy” access to guns by federal legislation (or more OBOZO dictatorial decrees) to severely limit ALL gun sales – OR WORSE – to American citizens. The F&F operation was totally and completed botched by the ATF/DOJ when they lost track of the thousands of weapons they let the cartel buy. Nonetheless, the weapons were used in thousands of murders, including the murders of US Border Patrol agents Brian Terry and Jaime Zapata.

Why the “Executive Privilege” cover-up: Documents showing the direct involvement in this plan by Valerie Jarrett, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, numerous other high WH officials and OBOZO, himself, would destroy this rogue, anti-Constitutional, anti-democracy regime if the public saw them. Hence, OBOZO will do whatever it takes to keep them hidden.

Why hold Holder in Contempt: He has stonewalled legitimate Congressional requests for F&F documents for well over a year, and he blatantly LIED to Congress in his 04 Feb 2011 letter stating no knowledge of or involvement in F&F.

TeaPartyNation on June 25, 2012 at 12:53 PM

If they get all the documents and there’s no evidence that this was about gun control its going to look really bad for the GOP. Assuming anyone starts to care about this story at all, as us Blacks only care about the check that’s to arrive in the mail.

libfreeordie on June 25, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Fixed that for you, sport.

MNHawk on June 25, 2012 at 12:54 PM

I expect that the assertion of Executive Privilege was done to hide emails that say things like -”what’s a few hundred dead Mexicans if it means we can get a new assault weapons ban?”

This is typical democratic party calculus, broken eggs and omelets, etc.

slickwillie2001 on June 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Let’s stipulate that Issa is no fool and that he knows more about the evidence of F&F than anyone else in D.C.

These two facts would support the theory that he has some evidence for this assertion. He knows that he’s taking a risk by even bringing this up because the media is always skeptical of conspiracies, unless conservatives are involved.

Compare this to lefties like Maddow and Maher who had never even heard of F&F until this week (because they live in the liberal bubble), but they are quite sure that F&F had NOTHING at all to do with the gun control agenda.

johnboy on June 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM

As Issa says, the entire structure of the ATF operation was so poor that it’s hard to see how anyone could have expected to get convictions in court from the results. Is that more incompetence, or an indication that the DoJ wasn’t really interested in convictions?

Issa isn’t a lawyer. The fact is ANY competent lawyer or law enforcement officer would understand that the methods used in Fast & Furious COULD NOT POSSIBLY RESULT IN CONVICTIONS. At least, no convictions of the imagined to exist Mexican arms trafficking kingpins.

By intentionally allowing arms to “walk”, they lost the ability to prove the how weapons came to be in the hands of criminals in Mexico illegally. The criminals’ possession of the weapons in Mexico, in and of itself cannot prove a violation of US laws. And that was all the evidence the US Attorney Phoenix Dennis Burke would have. By letting the straw purchasers walk, they can’t prove that any subsequent transfer by the straw purchaser was illegal. “Gunwalking” could NEVER result in the prosecutions they claimed were its purpose for existence.

If the alleged goal of gunwalking couldn’t be achieved, and any competent LEO or lawyer would recognize that fact, then the the alleged goal of prosecutions is a pretext, a cover story and a lie.

I am sick and tired of supposedly really, really smart lawyers and law school professors who are so oblivious to the nuts and bolts of the legal process that they can’t spot the obvious and preposterous pretext for what it is, let alone take the next step and answer the obvious question raised:

What was the real objective of gunwalking in Fast and Furious?

novaculus on June 25, 2012 at 12:56 PM

test

marinetbryant on June 25, 2012 at 12:56 PM

Aside from the fact that nothing in what I just wrote says that, I have also in the past specifically acknowledged congress need not have any proof at all to start or pursue an investigation.
But by all means, argue from a false premise.

verbaluce on June 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM

It’s funny you don’t know what you yourself write:

Fine that you don’t see this as ‘far-fetched at all’, but there is nothing to support such a theory beyond imagining sinister motives. As is typical of how this stuff gets played out in conspiracy theories, you feel it’s incumbent on Obama and the administration to to provide ‘documents’ that prove your suggestion false, wile you/others offer no documentation or evidence at all.
‘I have a wild speculation…prove I’m wrong.’
Thanks for cutting to the chase here.

You conflate asking for documents through a valid congressional subpoena to requiring that Obama to “provide ‘documents’ that prove your suggestion false, wile you/others offer no documentation or evidence at all.”

Hmm, what does that imply? That congress must prove that Obama did something wrong before congress can subpoena the documents. Or, is there some hidden meaning?

Do you mean to say that we can’t speculate, based on the evidence we have so far, as to what really happened in F&F absent the documents that Obama/Holder refuse to turn over?

What exactly do you think your point was?

I suppose your argument is that a partisan cannot assert another partisan’s intent and motive based on the evidence at hand? So, for instance, the DNC should not be constantly claiming that every single thing any republican does is a “dog whistle” or racist or meant to “suppress the vote” based on no evidence except your own (leftists generally) delusional dreams?

Monkeytoe on June 25, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4