Jump to content

Obama's Mexican Gunrunning Operation


Recommended Posts

Oops, looks like the number of guns may grow as we learn more...

 

UNIVISION OBTAINED AN EXCLUSIVE LIST THAT SHOWS ALL THE WEAPONS THAT WERE ALLOWED TO GO FROM THE UNITED STATES TO MEXICO. IT IS A COMPLETE INVENTORY, JUST FROM THE PHOENIX, ARIZONA OFFICE OF THE ATF, AND IT SPECIFIES THE MODEL AND SERIAL NUMBER OF 1,882 FIREARMS, INCLUDING RIFLES, GUNS AND SEMIAUTOMATIC WEAPONS.

 

Meanwhile, Rep. Issa is threatening the Justice Dept. with contempt of Congress.

 

The ATF allowed/encouraged almost 1,900 guns from one area to go to Mexico, and the only apparent recovery/tracking plan was to check serial numbers when one was recovered from a crime scene. Predictably, most are still missing down there.

 

When something that boneheaded happens, proper Congressional oversight demands that we find out why and prevent it from happening again. It's not as fun as calling for gun owners to take a draconian buttfucking again, but it is necessary.

 

So the claim is based on what somebody told Univision?

 

One figure is based on the Inspector General's report, the second based on a leak to Univision.

 

Apparently, some still want to handle this criminal stupidity by the ATF through channels, you know, on the QT, meaning cover it up.

 

That means that actual, officially verified information is hard to come by, even for those in Congress charged with oversight. It's impossible to get for mere citizens who want to know what their government is up to, at least for now. I'm hoping more whistleblowers and more subpoenas can solve that problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's Judge Jackson or Judge Berman Jackson. It isn't Judge Berman unless you're watching reality court TV at the laundromat. Actually, I did mean only those documents. Again, the Kenyan’s EP was

Maybe he'll be nicer now that his period is over.

People who have time to read things like the relevant Inspector General's report instead of just spewing insults and talking points know that the reality is that the stupid program was shut down under

Posted Images

A 33 year agent who blew the whistle tells why:

 

 

"You don't let guns walk. I have never let a gun walk. I've done a lot of undercover; I've never let guns walk."

 

If this were an ordinary information-gathering sting technique, you would think an agent with decades of undercover experience would have known about it, but I suppose Mark knows best, as always. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those not inclined to clicking and reading, here is an email sent by Phoenix ATF group supervisor David Voth to his team:

 

vothletter.gif

 

GO TEAM! The not-so-subtle message: if you do not agree with the Gunwalking program, you do not deserve to be here.

 

Sounds like some were trying to handle this "through channels" over a year ago, but with the top level of the ATF and their bosses at the Justice Dept showing this attitude, what is someone who thinks he deserves his job, but who also thinks gunwalking is monumentally stupid, supposed to do?

 

So a year ago we had dramatic reports about US guns in Mexico, we had calls for draconian new gun control laws to fix this problem, and we had Mark wondering if the NRA and sane Republicans would back that sensible solution.

 

What was really happening was that the ATF was telling gun dealers to make obvious straw sales, then watching the guns go to Mexico. At least one gun dealer objected, and asked for and got reassurances from ATF and the Justice Department that the guns were being monitored and that the dealer would not be in trouble. That was not true. Since then, the Justice Department has denied any knowledge of the program, and topped it off by allowing Congressman Issa, but not Senator Grassley, to review a few useless and irrelevant documents.

 

Treating a Senator that way is further evidence that I was right in my charitable assessment that this is all monumental stupidity by someone at Justice. If he were at all inclined to back off before, he won't be now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A 33 year agent who blew the whistle tells why:

 

 

"You don't let guns walk. I have never let a gun walk. I've done a lot of undercover; I've never let guns walk."

 

If this were an ordinary information-gathering sting technique, you would think an agent with decades of undercover experience would have known about it, but I suppose Mark knows best, as always. :rolleyes:

 

Just another case of the Liberal Mainstream Meeeeedia taking pot shots at the President. Oh wait... Different administration. They are credible now.

 

Carry on....

 

Ben

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are credible now.

 

 

What they really are now over at CBS is alone, or close to it, in reporting this story. It does not seem to be a popular story in the left wing outlets.

 

Don't believe me? Let's examine the latest update in the Washington Post on the Congressional hearings into Project Gunrunner....

 

The controversy highlights the difficulty ATF agents face in complex cases against increasingly sophisticated gunrunning rings, said former and current government officials. Because of weak gun laws and investigative limitations imposed at the urging of the gun lobby, many gunrunning cases end with little more than paperwork violations against buyers who procure guns for others. Such so-called straw purchaser cases rarely amount to more than charges of lying on federal documents.

 

OK, so as usual the "gun lobby" is to blame for "weak" gun laws that are the source of our problems, and all investigators can do is mess with straw buyers. As noted in the Inspector General's report, the referrals for prosecution of straw buyers are often ignored by federal prosecutors, who have bigger fish to fry.

 

The undercover operation’s goal, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich said in a letter to Grassley, was “to dismantle the entire trafficking organization, not merely to arrest straw purchasers.”

 

Weich added: “The allegation — that ATF ‘sanctioned’ or otherwise knowingly allowed the sale of assault weapons to a straw purchaser who then transported them into Mexico — is false.”

 

 

This article was written in March, and I don't feel like going back and checking the dates, but at this point we have videotape and a pile of other evidence showing that ATF definitely did knowingly allow such sales, and further that a representative from the Justice Department met with a skittish gun dealer to reassure him that he would not land in prison for ten years for all his trouble. In other words, we now know that Weich's statement was not true.

 

As for that goal...

 

Known within the multi-agency federal task force as Operation Fast and Furious, the undercover investigation culminated in January with 34 people being charged in a 53-count indictment that included drug smuggling and money laundering allegations.

 

Ooooh. Wow. They really went after the big shots, not the straw purchasers, right? Sure sounds like it if you do not click the link and see what it says...

 

PHOENIX – Grand juries have returned multi-count indictments in five cases against 34

defendants accused of assisting Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations with illegally trafficking

firearms from the United States to Mexico.

 

Beginning earlier this morning, a multi-agency law enforcement task force rounded up and

arrested 20 defendants named in the 53-count Avila indictment, which was unsealed today. More

than 100 officers were involved in the operation.

 

The Avila indictment alleges that from approximately September 2009 to December of

2010, the defendants conspired to purchase hundreds of firearms, including AK-47s, to be illegally

exported to Mexico. Defendants, none of whom are licensed firearms dealers, acted as “straw

purchasers” by falsely declaring that they were buying the weapons for themselves. AK-47’s are

considered the “weapon of choice” for Mexican Drug Trafficking Organizations.

 

Gee, right off the bat it looks like they got another batch of straw buyers, the very thing the Inspector General's report criticized them for doing. What about drug smuggling and money laundering?

 

Additional Indictments

 

The Avila indictment alleges one count of Conspiracy, one count of Dealing in Firearms

without a License, one count of Conspiracy to Distribute Marijuana, two counts of Possession with

Intent to Distribute Marijuana, one count of Conspiracy to Possess a Firearm in Furtherance of a

Drug Trafficking Offense, 35 counts of Making a False Statement in Connection with the

Acquisition of Firearms, one count of Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering and 11 counts of

Money Laundering.

 

The Flores indictment alleges one count of conspiracy and 17 counts of making a false

statement during the purchase of a firearm. This indictment includes 8 individuals that made

multiple “straw purchases.”

 

The Broome indictment alleges 1 count of conspiracy and 13 counts of making a false

statement during the purchase of a firearm. This indictment includes four defendants that were

involved in multiple “straw purchases” involving approximately 58 firearms.

3

 

The Aguilar indictment alleges 1 count of an individual making a false statement during the

purchase of a firearm.

 

The Abarca indictment alleges 6 counts of making a false statement during the purchase of

a firearm. The indictment alleges the defendant was involved in multiple “straw purchases”

involving approximately 13 firearms of which 6 were AK 47 type weapons.

 

The maximum penalties for some of the most serious counts include:

 

• 18 United States Code, Section 924(a)(1)(A); False Statements in Connection with the

Acquisition of Firearms 5yrs in prison , a $250,00 fine and/or both; Counts 7-41 of the

Avila Indictment

• 18 United States Code, Section 924(o); Conspiracy to Possess a Firearm in Furtherance of a

Drug Trafficking Offense 20 yrs in prison , a $250,000 and/or both; Count 6 of the Avila

Indictment

• 18 United States Code, Section 371; Conspiracy; 5yrs in prison, a $250,00 fine and/or both;

Count 1 of the Avila Indictment (the objects of the conspiracy are alleged to be making

false statements to acquire firearms in order to deal in firearms without a license and in the

course of dealing without a license, transporting and shipping firearms out of the United

States)

 

Uh huh. They found some weed at some of the scenes when rounding up another batch of straw buyers, is what it sounds like to me. Note that despite our "weak" gun laws, the most serious penalties are for the firearms crimes.

 

Since March, there have been some developments in this story that would seem newsworthy to the Washington Post if the subject were not guns.

 

Hat tip to CBS for following the story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, Congress is not waiting for cooperation...

 

CBS News has learned that House and Senate investigators have descended upon Arizona for their probe into the so-called "Gunwalker" scandal. They're gathering interviews from witnesses, including ATF insiders and area gun shop owners. Sources tell CBS News the congressional investigators are frustrated by what they view as across-the-board stonewalling by government agencies which have refused to provide information in the investigation. Government officials have said they won't provide information while their own investigations are ongoing.

 

So is gunwalking really still ongoing?

 

Not according to the new policy memo:

 

CBS News has obtained an internal message sent from the Justice Department to Southwest Border US Attorneys last week.

 

It reads, in part: "We should not design or conduct undercover operations which include guns crossing the border. If we have knowledge that guns are about to cross the border, we must take immediate action to stop the firearms from crossing the border, even if that prematurely terminates or otherwise jeopardizes an investigation."

 

 

This is an odd new policy, considering that Justice is still officially denying that gunwalking was the old policy.

 

Holder is denying he knew of any gunwalking, so either:

 

1. He's lying and knew about it, or

 

2. Someone at Justice has been running this operation without his knowledge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PITTSBURGH—The National Rifle Association's CEO Saturday said Attorney General Eric Holder should step down for allowing an operation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to occur on his watch that involved the sale of guns to suspicious customers with ties to Mexican drug cartels.

 

The ATF allegedly encouraged gun dealers to sell multiple firearms to known and suspected criminals as part of a broader sting operation to crack down on gunrunning. In a speech to thousands of gun activists here, NRA chief Wayne LaPierre said two assault rifles that the ATF "let walk" were found at the crime scene where a border patrol agent was gunned down in December.

 

"Operation Fast and Furious may have gotten one or perhaps two federal agents killed, and countless other innocent victims have been murdered with the illegal guns that our own government allowed into Mexico all to advance a political agenda," he said.

 

The longtime NRA leader played clips of Obama saying neither he nor Holder authorized the operation.

 

"He's the attorney general of the United States of America — the highest law-enforcement officer in our land," LaPierre said. "Who's in charge? If he didn't know, then who's minding the store? If Holder didn't know, Holder has got to go."

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It does seem strange that Holder is allowing some unnamed person in his department to make him look like such a fool.

 

If he is telling the truth and did not know, it means that someone at Justice has been running this foolish and illegal operation under his nose for years, he never figured it out, and his subordinates do not respect or trust him enough to tell him what they are doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On March 30, 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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the disinformation campaign continues at the Washington Post...

 

Croley, who since August has been Obama’s assistant for justice and regulatory policy, favors closing a loophole in the law that allows unlicensed gun dealers to sell arms without background checks, especially at gun shows.

 

There is no such loophole, and in fact, another way of saying unlicensed gun dealer in fewer words is: criminal. If you are a dealer, you must have a license, and you must do background checks.

 

The loophole in the law is for private individual sales, and it does not "especially" apply at gun shows, where 0.7 to 1.7% of guns used in crimes are purchased. It applies everywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Issa Eviscerates Holder on Gunrunner

ISSA: How about the head of the Criminal Division, Lanny Breuer. Did he authorize it?

 

HOLDER: I'm not sure whether Mr. Breuer authorized it. You have to understand the way in which the Department operates. Although there are operations, this one has become — has gotten a great deal of publicity.

 

ISSA:
Yeah, there are dead Americans as a result of this failed and reckless program. So I would say that it hasn't gotten
enough
attention, has it, Mr. Attorney General?

 

ISSA: We're not looking at the straw buyers, Mr. Attorney General.
We're looking at you.
We're looking at your key people who knew or should have known about this and whether or not your judgment was consistent with good practices and whether or not instead the Justice Department is basically guilty of allowing weapons to kill Americans and Mexicans. So will you agree to cooperate with that investigation both on the House and Senate side?

 

HOLDER: We'll certainly cooperate with all the investigations, but I'm going to take great exception to what you just said. The notion that somehow or other this Justice Department is responsible for those deaths that you mentioned, that assertion's offensive. And I want to tell you that –

 

ISSA:
But what if it's accurate, Mr. Attorney General?

 

More:

This scandal isn't going away.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just reading up on this, Holder really is turning into a joke. The guy never "knows" when asked a question that by all rights the AG should know.

 

If Obama wins reelection I expect he will be the first to go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

HOLDER: We'll certainly cooperate with all the investigations...

 

Future tense noted. I wonder when this cooperation will begin?

 

Holder can run be he can't hide:

 

 

Three Project Gunrunner documents Rep. Darrell Issa, California Republican and House Oversight Committee chairman, released on Wednesday show high-ranking Justice Department officials were aware of Operation Fast and Furious and that there was a consistent administration policy that allowed American guns to be “walked” into Mexican drug cartels’ possession.

 

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/04/new-project-gunrunner-documents-peg-top-doj-officials/#ixzz1LU1MSLIh

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. If this one is true, it's going to be very hard to explain:

 

In a second, equally explosive disclosure, a law enforcement source tells Fox News, that ATF undercover agents were acting as the straw buyers and purchasing guns using government-issued false identifications and then providing those guns to cartel traffickers to gain credibility in their undercover roles. In that capacity, the ATF "provided 2, 50 cal. machine guns to traffickers that are loose in Mexico and unaccounted for," the source said.

 

That'll definitely up your street cred!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thing the death of bin laden is taking all the air time. Because this story is getting worse and worse 50 cal machine guns, Unbelievable

 

 

I notice the Lefties are giving this a wide berth

 

How did Georgie do that

Chirp... Chirp.... Chirp

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. If this one is true, it's going to be very hard to explain:

 

In a second, equally explosive disclosure, a law enforcement source tells Fox News, that ATF undercover agents were acting as the straw buyers and purchasing guns using government-issued false identifications and then providing those guns to cartel traffickers to gain credibility in their undercover roles. In that capacity, the ATF "provided 2, 50 cal. machine guns to traffickers that are loose in Mexico and unaccounted for," the source said.

 

That'll definitely up your street cred!

 

Fox News. Now there's a reliable source.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thing the death of bin laden is taking all the air time. Because this story is getting worse and worse 50 cal machine guns, Unbelievable

 

 

I notice the Lefties are giving this a wide berth

 

How did Georgie do that

Chirp... Chirp.... Chirp

 

Remarkable, since it's now clear that the notion of the sellers of guns being responsible for the crimes done with them seems to be an accepted truth by both sides, isn't it?

 

Un-named Fox News sources notwithstanding, let's let the whole story come out. We don't want to be putting draconian restrictions on the sellers of 50 cals through non-existent loopholes without due process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. If this one is true, it's going to be very hard to explain:

 

In a second, equally explosive disclosure, a law enforcement source tells Fox News, that ATF undercover agents were acting as the straw buyers and purchasing guns using government-issued false identifications and then providing those guns to cartel traffickers to gain credibility in their undercover roles. In that capacity, the ATF "provided 2, 50 cal. machine guns to traffickers that are loose in Mexico and unaccounted for," the source said.

 

That'll definitely up your street cred!

 

"You’ve got three people close to the President who are in the crosshairs of the ATF’s Gunwalker fiasco: Attorney General Eric Holder, former WH Chief of Staff (and newly-elected mayor of Chicago) Rahm Emmanuel, and DHS Chiefette, Janet Napolitano. All three are implicated because of their connection with Assistant AG Lanny Breuer.... The more they deflect, circle the wagons, spin, and deny, the worse it’s gonna be for the guy with the home office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue."

the “smoking gun” memo that Senator Grassley has revealed shows that Assistant AG Breuer knew the whole story, and has known it from almost the beginning. That’s bad news for the hapless trio of Holder, Napalitano and Emmanuel. (Paradoxically, it’s good news for La Hillary, should she decide to abandon the sinking ship and take another run at the White House on her own.)

 

"What did he know, and when did he know it? Well, substitute “Obama” for “he” in the previous sentence, and you’ve got the makings of another Presidential scandal – one the inside of the Beltway hasn’t seen since 1974. If history repeats itself (and it has a nasty habit of doing so) we could be in for one Hell of a flashback." (reference to Watergate) http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/05/brad-kozak/atf-death-watch-3-what-did-holder-know-and-when-did-he-know-it/#more-43767

 

OBL and resistance to criticism anything "progressive" has kept the MSM away from this scandal, but sooner or later the story will have to go primetime.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. If this one is true, it's going to be very hard to explain:

 

In a second, equally explosive disclosure, a law enforcement source tells Fox News, that ATF undercover agents were acting as the straw buyers and purchasing guns using government-issued false identifications and then providing those guns to cartel traffickers to gain credibility in their undercover roles. In that capacity, the ATF "provided 2, 50 cal. machine guns to traffickers that are loose in Mexico and unaccounted for," the source said.

 

That'll definitely up your street cred!

 

Fox News. Now there's a reliable source.

 

Maybe you can find better coverage of this story for us? Try the Washington Post! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

let's let the whole story come out.

 

"Let" is hardly the word. The story will eventually be pried out, despite the stonewalling currently underway. There are too many whistleblowers and too many documents on the loose already for the coverup to succeed in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. If this one is true, it's going to be very hard to explain:

 

In a second, equally explosive disclosure, a law enforcement source tells Fox News, that ATF undercover agents were acting as the straw buyers and purchasing guns using government-issued false identifications and then providing those guns to cartel traffickers to gain credibility in their undercover roles. In that capacity, the ATF "provided 2, 50 cal. machine guns to traffickers that are loose in Mexico and unaccounted for," the source said.

 

That'll definitely up your street cred!

 

"You’ve got three people close to the President who are in the crosshairs of the ATF’s Gunwalker fiasco: Attorney General Eric Holder, former WH Chief of Staff (and newly-elected mayor of Chicago) Rahm Emmanuel, and DHS Chiefette, Janet Napolitano. All three are implicated because of their connection with Assistant AG Lanny Breuer.... The more they deflect, circle the wagons, spin, and deny, the worse it’s gonna be for the guy with the home office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue."

the “smoking gun” memo that Senator Grassley has revealed shows that Assistant AG Breuer knew the whole story, and has known it from almost the beginning. That’s bad news for the hapless trio of Holder, Napalitano and Emmanuel. (Paradoxically, it’s good news for La Hillary, should she decide to abandon the sinking ship and take another run at the White House on her own.)

 

"What did he know, and when did he know it? Well, substitute “Obama” for “he” in the previous sentence, and you’ve got the makings of another Presidential scandal – one the inside of the Beltway hasn’t seen since 1974. If history repeats itself (and it has a nasty habit of doing so) we could be in for one Hell of a flashback." (reference to Watergate) http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/05/brad-kozak/atf-death-watch-3-what-did-holder-know-and-when-did-he-know-it/#more-43767

 

OBL and resistance to criticism anything "progressive" has kept the MSM away from this scandal, but sooner or later the story will have to go primetime.

 

 

 

"ATF Death Watch"

 

That's a hoot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Remarkable, since it's now clear that the notion of the sellers of guns being responsible for the crimes done with them seems to be an accepted truth by both sides, isn't it?

 

 

A year ago, the story line was that greedy gun merchants of death were selling arms willy-nilly and they were ending up in Mexico, and the argument was that the sellers of guns are responsible for crimes.

 

Now, the story is that the gun merchants were suspicious of obvious straw buyers and did not want to sell to them, but the ATF and Justice Department told them to go ahead and sell to these criminals, so the argument is that the sellers of guns are responsible for crimes.

 

Amazing how the facts about who was making these foolish decisions do not in any way change who is to blame for this fiasco in your mind, Mark, but not very surprising. For you, it is always going to be the evil gun dealers, and never the bureaucrats, isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't get about this is why didn't the ATF didn't try to kill two birds with one stone.... i.e. Why didn't the ATF use this opportunity to see which, if any dealers WOULD sell these ams to obvious straw buyers while they were running this Op rather than have to babysit and coddle legit gun dealers into selling these arms? That way they could have rolled up the bad seeds out there.

 

What's an "obvious" straw buyer? Gonna lay charges, gotta have something pretty hard to refute. It's tricky enough for them to prove that the transaction between the straw buyer and the bad guys isn't a private citizen selling his own personal property to someone else. Saw some reports about a great many of the charges filed have been dismissed without them ever going to trial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't get about this is why didn't the ATF didn't try to kill two birds with one stone.... i.e. Why didn't the ATF use this opportunity to see which, if any dealers WOULD sell these ams to obvious straw buyers while they were running this Op rather than have to babysit and coddle legit gun dealers into selling these arms? That way they could have rolled up the bad seeds out there.

 

Perhaps that is how these dealers came to their attention in the first place, and came to cooperate with them despite knowing they could land in the clink for a very long time, and despite never receiving the written assurances that were requested.

 

It seems they wanted the serial numbers off the guns. You kind of need a cooperating dealer for that, not one who does not know he is being investigated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's an "obvious" straw buyer? ... Saw some reports about a great many of the charges filed have been dismissed without them ever going to trial.

 

In this case, it seems that the straw buyers were repeat customers who always bought semi autos favored by Mexican cartels, always paid cash, and sometimes transferred the guns right in the parking lot, among other obvious clues. That included actually discussing the straw sales right in front of one dealer, apparently, but in that case the sale was actually refused.

 

According to the Inspector General's report, the charges were not pursued by federal prosecutors mainly because straw buyers are "small fry" in the gun world: people of little consequence who are easily replaced if you take one off the streets. One of the IG's complaints about this operation is that all it ended up producing was a bunch of straw buyers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's an "obvious" straw buyer? ... Saw some reports about a great many of the charges filed have been dismissed without them ever going to trial.

 

In this case, it seems that the straw buyers were repeat customers who always bought semi autos favored by Mexican cartels, always paid cash, and sometimes transferred the guns right in the parking lot, among other obvious clues. That included actually discussing the straw sales right in front of one dealer, apparently, but in that case the sale was actually refused.

 

According to the Inspector General's report, the charges were not pursued by federal prosecutors mainly because straw buyers are "small fry" in the gun world: people of little consequence who are easily replaced if you take one off the streets. One of the IG's complaints about this operation is that all it ended up producing was a bunch of straw buyers.

 

Might be why they decided to go after Mexicans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's an "obvious" straw buyer? ... Saw some reports about a great many of the charges filed have been dismissed without them ever going to trial.

 

In this case, it seems that the straw buyers were repeat customers who always bought semi autos favored by Mexican cartels, always paid cash, and sometimes transferred the guns right in the parking lot, among other obvious clues. That included actually discussing the straw sales right in front of one dealer, apparently, but in that case the sale was actually refused.

 

According to the Inspector General's report, the charges were not pursued by federal prosecutors mainly because straw buyers are "small fry" in the gun world: people of little consequence who are easily replaced if you take one off the streets. One of the IG's complaints about this operation is that all it ended up producing was a bunch of straw buyers.

 

Might be why they decided to go after Mexicans.

 

It was odd that no one in ATF's Mexican division knew of the operation, or was waiting for the guns or tracking them when they arrived, and it's odd that no cartel leaders have been brought down by this great sting, isn't it?

 

Marking down serial numbers and watching guns go into Mexico and then rounding up a few straw buyers and a few guns at Mexican crime scenes seems like such a foolproof plan to take down a cartel guy, it's hard to see how it failed so badly. :rolleyes:

 

The only thing it seems to have produced so far was scary headlines and calls for gun control a year ago and lots of silence these days. I'm enjoying the serenity, but not enough to stop updating this thread. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's an "obvious" straw buyer? ... Saw some reports about a great many of the charges filed have been dismissed without them ever going to trial.

 

In this case, it seems that the straw buyers were repeat customers who always bought semi autos favored by Mexican cartels, always paid cash, and sometimes transferred the guns right in the parking lot, among other obvious clues. That included actually discussing the straw sales right in front of one dealer, apparently, but in that case the sale was actually refused.

 

According to the Inspector General's report, the charges were not pursued by federal prosecutors mainly because straw buyers are "small fry" in the gun world: people of little consequence who are easily replaced if you take one off the streets. One of the IG's complaints about this operation is that all it ended up producing was a bunch of straw buyers.

 

Might be why they decided to go after Mexicans.

 

It was odd that no one in ATF's Mexican division knew of the operation, or was waiting for the guns or tracking them when they arrived, and it's odd that no cartel leaders have been brought down by this great sting, isn't it?

 

Marking down serial numbers and watching guns go into Mexico and then rounding up a few straw buyers and a few guns at Mexican crime scenes seems like such a foolproof plan to take down a cartel guy, it's hard to see how it failed so badly. :rolleyes:

 

The only thing it seems to have produced so far was scary headlines and calls for gun control a year ago and lots of silence these days. I'm enjoying the serenity, but not enough to stop updating this thread. :P

 

Who is saying that nobody in ATF's "mexico division" knew nothing of this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is saying that nobody in ATF's "mexico division" knew nothing of this?

 

The conclusions of the Inspector General's report included this excerpt:

 

ATF also needs to improve its own internal processes for collecting,

analyzing and disseminating intelligence sent to field agents. ATF Field

Intelligence Groups should work with their respective Southwest border

enforcement groups to develop guidelines for the production of timely and

relevant investigative leads. ATF managers need an automated system to

track, monitor the outcome of, and evaluate the usefulness of, investigative

leads.

In addition, ATF needs to improve its sharing of firearms-trafficking

related information and techniques within its intelligence structure. ATF

Southwest border intelligence personnel need to more routinely exchange

information, analytical techniques, and best practices within and across

field divisions.

ATF also needs to revisit its implementation of a key component of

Project Gunrunner – the Border Liaison Program. We found that the

liaisons need to coordinate their cross-border activities between their own

field divisions and ATF’s Mexico Country Office and need their roles more

clearly defined.

Project Gunrunner’s investigative focus has largely remained on gun

dealer inspections and straw purchaser investigations, rather than targeting

higher-level traffickers and smugglers. As a result, ATF has not made full

use of the intelligence, technological, and prosecutorial resources that can

help ATF’s investigations reach into the higher levels of trafficking rings.

 

IG reports are notoriously bland, and that counts as a scolding in IG language.

 

In this thread, you might have seen this bit:

 

But if Justice Department officials knew, it's even more incredible when you find out who didn't: ATF's own agents in Mexico.

 

 

 

Gil first found out something was amiss in early 2010 when serial numbers from a flood of guns used in cartel crimes were all tracing back to the same case in Phoenix: "Fast and Furious." But when Gil's analyst checked ATF's computer files to find out more, he hit a brick wall.

 

 

 

"Not only did he not have access, I as the attache, the head agent in Mexico for ATF operations, did not have access," says Gil. He was locked out.

 

That was a red flag because Gil says as the senior ATF official in Mexico, it was his job to approve any ATF operation involving Mexico; and he didn't approve this one.

 

 

 

In fact, Gil specifically emailed his staff on Jan. 25, 2010 that no firearms would be allowed to cross into Mexico for a case without his approval. The email also stated that if he ever approved such an operation, he'd make sure the weapons were "stopped on the Mexican side of the border." They'd never be allowed to "walk" or reach the streets.

 

The head of the ATF in Mexico was not informed, and the Inspector General scolded the ATF for a variety of things, including not sharing information.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are attacking the field agents. They must want to stop them from running stings. NRA false flag operation? Pretend to be a crusader against gun smugglers to cover up the attack on ATF's stings that hurt sales?

 

Uh oh. Looks like the Obama administration is deflecting and trying to push the blame down the chain of command a bit...

 

President Obama’s Justice Department is trying to deflect responsibility over decisions in the Project Gunrunner and Operation Fast and Furious investigations, which are being spearheaded by House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, California Republican, and Sen. Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican. Last Wednesday, Issa released new Project Gunrunner documents, including an approved wiretap application bearing Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer’s name. Though Breuer didn’t sign it, his Deputy Assistant Attorney General (DAAG), Kenneth Blanc, did.

 

Now the DOJ says Blanc’s signature and Breuer’s name doesn’t imply any federal-level responsibility. Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler told The Daily Caller that the Obama administration’s DOJ officials routinely approve thousands of wiretap applications without knowing the specifics of the cases they’re signing off on.

 

“The review process for wiretap applications is a narrow assessment of whether a legal basis exists to support a surveillance request that ultimately goes before a judge for decision,” Schmaler said in an email. “These reviews are not approval of the underlying investigations or operations.”

 

House Oversight Committee spokesman Frederick Hill told TheDC he thinks it’s disturbing that the DOJ is routinely approving wiretap applications like this one. “The assertion that the Justice Department has a robo-signing process for wiretap applications is a deeply troubling defense,” Hill said in an email. “Applications for wiretaps generally include detailed descriptions of law enforcement activities, sworn statements and explanations for why invasive wiretaps are crucial to an investigation. Claiming ignorance on an operation where wiretaps were approved by high level officials raises even more concerns about irresponsible and reckless decisions by Justice officials that contributed to the deaths of two federal agents.”

 

...

 

 

Schmaler said the applications still have to go before a judge for final approval. But, Schmaler shifts any DOJ responsibility down the chain to local officials, even though Obama’s politically appointed U.S. attorney Dennis Burke, who oversees the U.S. Attorney’s Arizona District, has made decisions on the gun “walking” programs, along with several local officials. “As the department has stated, the Fast and Furious operation was approved by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Arizona and the ATF Phoenix Field Office,” Schmaler told TheDC. “The investigation was subsequently approved by the multi-agency Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) Program.”

 

It probably won't take long for some of these would-be scapegoats to figure out the new game and start talking to Congressional investigators about who was in the loop on this operation. Should start getting interesting...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama Regime Stonewalls Investigation Into Gun Running Outrage

The "mainstream" media has been trying to suppress the story; but then, it initially tried to suppress Monica Lewinsky too. In the age of the internet , nothing as explosive as the federal governmentl attempting to cover up a program to undercut the Second Amendment by facilitating the illegal traffic of American guns into the hands of Mexican criminals can be hushed up forever — especially not when these guns have been used to

kill a Border Patrol agent. Here's an update on Senator Chuck Grassley's efforts to get over the Clintonesque stone wall:

 

U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has sent 10 letters to the U.S. Department of Justice seeking answers about how 1,700 firearms were allowed to be sold and smuggled illegally into Mexico.

He has received five letters in response, two of which contradict evidence he's received from whistleblowers in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives who were involved in Operation Fast and Furious.

But earlier this week, the senator, ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, had the chance to face the department's head Eric Holder and get the answers that have been lacking. Instead, he was left again feeling ignored.

"I didn't get a lot of answers from him either," Grassley said during a conference call with reporters after the hearing with Holder.

Grassley, who first raised this concern with the operation nearly four months ago, believes he's being ignored either because the Justice Department doesn't feel the need to respond to a member of the minority party or because if it did respond adequately, it would admit guilt.

Another reason Grassley is being ignored is that Holder and his boss Obama have the media on their side; otherwise the punk in the White house would be in the process of getting hounded out of office by now.

 

Grassley notes that apparently "our own government knowingly participated in arming criminals, drug cartels, and those who later killed federal agents."

 

Left-wing partisans have so thoroughly destroyed the establishment media that this is not considered newsworthy. But sooner or later this bombshell will become widely known to the public.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is saying that nobody in ATF's "mexico division" knew nothing of this?

 

The conclusions of the Inspector General's report included this excerpt:

 

ATF also needs to improve its own internal processes for collecting,

analyzing and disseminating intelligence sent to field agents. ATF Field

Intelligence Groups should work with their respective Southwest border

enforcement groups to develop guidelines for the production of timely and

relevant investigative leads. ATF managers need an automated system to

track, monitor the outcome of, and evaluate the usefulness of, investigative

leads.

In addition, ATF needs to improve its sharing of firearms-trafficking

related information and techniques within its intelligence structure. ATF

Southwest border intelligence personnel need to more routinely exchange

information, analytical techniques, and best practices within and across

field divisions.

ATF also needs to revisit its implementation of a key component of

Project Gunrunner – the Border Liaison Program. We found that the

liaisons need to coordinate their cross-border activities between their own

field divisions and ATF’s Mexico Country Office and need their roles more

clearly defined.

Project Gunrunner’s investigative focus has largely remained on gun

dealer inspections and straw purchaser investigations, rather than targeting

higher-level traffickers and smugglers. As a result, ATF has not made full

use of the intelligence, technological, and prosecutorial resources that can

help ATF’s investigations reach into the higher levels of trafficking rings.

 

IG reports are notoriously bland, and that counts as a scolding in IG language.

 

In this thread, you might have seen this bit:

 

But if Justice Department officials knew, it's even more incredible when you find out who didn't: ATF's own agents in Mexico.

 

 

 

Gil first found out something was amiss in early 2010 when serial numbers from a flood of guns used in cartel crimes were all tracing back to the same case in Phoenix: "Fast and Furious." But when Gil's analyst checked ATF's computer files to find out more, he hit a brick wall.

 

 

 

"Not only did he not have access, I as the attache, the head agent in Mexico for ATF operations, did not have access," says Gil. He was locked out.

 

That was a red flag because Gil says as the senior ATF official in Mexico, it was his job to approve any ATF operation involving Mexico; and he didn't approve this one.

 

 

 

In fact, Gil specifically emailed his staff on Jan. 25, 2010 that no firearms would be allowed to cross into Mexico for a case without his approval. The email also stated that if he ever approved such an operation, he'd make sure the weapons were "stopped on the Mexican side of the border." They'd never be allowed to "walk" or reach the streets.

 

The head of the ATF in Mexico was not informed, and the Inspector General scolded the ATF for a variety of things, including not sharing information.

 

Doesn't seem all that shocking to me. UC ops are quite typically compartmentalized within LE agencies on a "need to know" basis. The ATF has no jurisdiction in Mexico, so this guy may have been just a liaison to the Mexican government.

 

They wouldn't be on the list either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Doesn't seem all that shocking to me. UC ops are quite typically compartmentalized within LE agencies on a "need to know" basis. The ATF has no jurisdiction in Mexico, so this guy may have been just a liaison to the Mexican government.

 

They wouldn't be on the list either.

 

It's not consistent with the current story: that someone from DOJ in Phoenix was running a federal multi-agency task force, and has sufficient authority to set a new policy (since changed) allowing guns to be "walked" to Mexico, and to keep Gil out of the loop?

 

Sounds to me more like something that would happen in Washington, but until Atty General Holder's cooperation with Congressional investigators begins, we will not really know.

 

In any case, Gil was rightly concerned about the ramifications that could hit his men...

 

"The (Mexican) government's looking at (ATF agents) potentially bringing weapons into their country, which in many cases is an act of war." Gil says by not explaining that ATF agents in Mexico weren't part of Fast and Furious, ATF executives are putting the agents in danger. "They're leaving my guys out in Mexico alone, and they're not doing the right thing."

 

He did not want them to get any unwanted messages...

 

This was a message from the Cartels: "We treat all police the same when they are in Mexico, pendejos, and we are on to this game."

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Doesn't seem all that shocking to me. UC ops are quite typically compartmentalized within LE agencies on a "need to know" basis. The ATF has no jurisdiction in Mexico, so this guy may have been just a liaison to the Mexican government.

 

They wouldn't be on the list either.

 

It's not consistent with the current story: that someone from DOJ in Phoenix was running a federal multi-agency task force, and has sufficient authority to set a new policy (since changed) allowing guns to be "walked" to Mexico, and to keep Gil out of the loop?

 

Sounds to me more like something that would happen in Washington, but until Atty General Holder's cooperation with Congressional investigators begins, we will not really know.

 

In any case, Gil was rightly concerned about the ramifications that could hit his men...

 

"The (Mexican) government's looking at (ATF agents) potentially bringing weapons into their country, which in many cases is an act of war." Gil says by not explaining that ATF agents in Mexico weren't part of Fast and Furious, ATF executives are putting the agents in danger. "They're leaving my guys out in Mexico alone, and they're not doing the right thing."

 

He did not want them to get any unwanted messages...

 

This was a message from the Cartels: "We treat all police the same when they are in Mexico, pendejos, and we are on to this game."

 

I would ask him if he felt ATF agents would be safe in Mexico if "Fast and Furious" were not running. That's the wild west down there. Nearly 40,000 dead. Almost makes Afghanistan look like Disney Land. You are running agents into that with the expectation of NOT pissing off the Cartels??

 

Seems kinda silly to be laying all the risk on F&F, doesn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't seem all that shocking to me. UC ops are quite typically compartmentalized within LE agencies on a "need to know" basis. The ATF has no jurisdiction in Mexico, so this guy may have been just a liaison to the Mexican government.

 

They wouldn't be on the list either.

 

It's not consistent with the current story: that someone from DOJ in Phoenix was running a federal multi-agency task force, and has sufficient authority to set a new policy (since changed) allowing guns to be "walked" to Mexico, and to keep Gil out of the loop?

 

Sounds to me more like something that would happen in Washington, but until Atty General Holder's cooperation with Congressional investigators begins, we will not really know.

 

In any case, Gil was rightly concerned about the ramifications that could hit his men...

 

"The (Mexican) government's looking at (ATF agents) potentially bringing weapons into their country, which in many cases is an act of war." Gil says by not explaining that ATF agents in Mexico weren't part of Fast and Furious, ATF executives are putting the agents in danger. "They're leaving my guys out in Mexico alone, and they're not doing the right thing."

 

He did not want them to get any unwanted messages...

 

This was a message from the Cartels: "We treat all police the same when they are in Mexico, pendejos, and we are on to this game."

 

I would ask him if he felt ATF agents would be safe in Mexico if "Fast and Furious" were not running. That's the wild west down there. Nearly 40,000 dead. Almost makes Afghanistan look like Disney Land. You are running agents into that with the expectation of NOT pissing off the Cartels??

 

Seems kinda silly to be laying all the risk on F&F, doesn't it?

 

See bolded part above. It is not just the cartels, but the Mexican government, who are pissed off. Noting that the Gunwalking operation increased the risk is not the same as assigning all risk to the program, but nice try with the strawman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

See bolded part above. It is not just the cartels, but the Mexican government, who are pissed off. Noting that the Gunwalking operation increased the risk is not the same as assigning all risk to the program, but nice try with the strawman.

 

The Mexican government being excluded is not even a slight surprise. It's as crooked as a dogs hind leg, by virtue of the ability of the cartels to buy people within it. A good book on this subject is "Murder City" by Charles Bowden.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See bolded part above. It is not just the cartels, but the Mexican government, who are pissed off. Noting that the Gunwalking operation increased the risk is not the same as assigning all risk to the program, but nice try with the strawman.

 

The Mexican government being excluded is not even a slight surprise. It's as crooked as a dogs hind leg, by virtue of the ability of the cartels to buy people within it. A good book on this subject is "Murder City" by Charles Bowden.

 

Strawman? How is that a strawman?

 

Mexican corruption is an excuse for disrespecting their sovereignty? Good thing we're corruption-free! <_<

 

A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

 

"Laying all the risk on F&F" is superficially similar to saying that gunwalking increases risk, and calling it silly refutes the strawman without ever having actually refuted the idea that gunwalking increases risk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See bolded part above. It is not just the cartels, but the Mexican government, who are pissed off. Noting that the Gunwalking operation increased the risk is not the same as assigning all risk to the program, but nice try with the strawman.

 

The Mexican government being excluded is not even a slight surprise. It's as crooked as a dogs hind leg, by virtue of the ability of the cartels to buy people within it. A good book on this subject is "Murder City" by Charles Bowden.

 

Strawman? How is that a strawman?

 

Mexican corruption is an excuse for disrespecting their sovereignty? Good thing we're corruption-free! <_<

 

A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

 

"Laying all the risk on F&F" is superficially similar to saying that gunwalking increases risk, and calling it silly refutes the strawman without ever having actually refuted the idea that gunwalking increases risk.

 

Pedantic focus on "all" is all that is. In a land where town have 18 year old girls serving as chief of police in a combination of teenage naivety and the simple fact that a cop has next to no chance of living a month, the increase in risk is quite slight. The ATF is down there to fuck with the cartels.

 

Especially silly when you would put those agents at more risk by respecting Mexican "sovereignty".

Link to post
Share on other sites

See bolded part above. It is not just the cartels, but the Mexican government, who are pissed off. Noting that the Gunwalking operation increased the risk is not the same as assigning all risk to the program, but nice try with the strawman.

 

The Mexican government being excluded is not even a slight surprise. It's as crooked as a dogs hind leg, by virtue of the ability of the cartels to buy people within it. A good book on this subject is "Murder City" by Charles Bowden.

 

Strawman? How is that a strawman?

 

Mexican corruption is an excuse for disrespecting their sovereignty? Good thing we're corruption-free! <_<

 

 

Should we have respected Pakistan's sovereignty?

 

Sometimes our "allies" aren't our allies. That's plain.

 

Bin-Laden-Killed-Map-of-Abbotabad-Compound.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially silly when you would put those agents at more risk by respecting Mexican "sovereignty".

 

So I take it you disagree with the new policy, which the administration claims has been the policy all along, of not letting guns walk to Mexico? And you think our agents are actually safer if we illegally transfer lots of guns down there?

 

I think Brian Terry's family would disagree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should we have respected Pakistan's sovereignty?

 

 

What we did in Pakistan was an act of war, and as the head of ATF in Mexico pointed out, so is importing weapons into Mexico.

 

In both cases, the presumptive answer to your question should be yes, but sometimes acts of war are necessary.

 

Do you think this operation was a necessary act of war? Do you disagree with the new policy against gunwalking, which the administration claims has been the policy all along?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially silly when you would put those agents at more risk by respecting Mexican "sovereignty".

 

So I take it you disagree with the new policy, which the administration claims has been the policy all along, of not letting guns walk to Mexico? And you think our agents are actually safer if we illegally transfer lots of guns down there?

 

 

 

Not at all. Merely pointing out the flaws in the theory that the operation made Mexico a dangerous place for ATF agents, and LE in general.

 

Should official policy always reflect clandestine operations in foreign countries? We had best send the Chinese a memo that we are spying on them, if so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should we have respected Pakistan's sovereignty?

 

 

What we did in Pakistan was an act of war, and as the head of ATF in Mexico pointed out, so is importing weapons into Mexico.

 

In both cases, the presumptive answer to your question should be yes, but sometimes acts of war are necessary.

 

Do you think this operation was a necessary act of war? Do you disagree with the new policy against gunwalking, which the administration claims has been the policy all along?

 

1. If the ATF in fact OK'd the sale of weapon to straw purchasers and then did not actively track those weapons it was wrong.

2. I don't think that what the ATF did was "an act of war." I think that it's the Mexican government's job to keep illegal weapons out of their country, just like it's our job to keep illegal immigrants out of ours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If the ATF in fact OK'd the sale of weapon to straw purchasers and then did not actively track those weapons it was wrong.

 

 

If? Deny reality much? Do you think the Inspector General's report is lying about this operation? That the various whistleblowers are lying? That the DOJ is stonewal...uh...investigating nothing at all?

 

The question is not whether ATF did that, since it is clear that they did. The question is not even whether their bosses at the Justice Department authorized it, since that is also clear now. The only remaining question really is how high up in the Justice Department did that authorization originate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If the ATF in fact OK'd the sale of weapon to straw purchasers and then did not actively track those weapons it was wrong.

 

 

If? Deny reality much? Do you think the Inspector General's report is lying about this operation? That the various whistleblowers are lying? That the DOJ is stonewal...uh...investigating nothing at all?

 

 

Which IG report are you talking about? This one? What do you think it says about the "gunwalking" that purportedly happened in F&F?

 

The question is not whether ATF did that, since it is clear that they did. The question is not even whether their bosses at the Justice Department authorized it, since that is also clear now. The only remaining question really is how high up in the Justice Department did that authorization originate.

 

No it's not. It appears that at some point DOJ was contacted about F&F. But it's not at all "clear" what transpired in those contacts. A bunch of hearsay is not worth anything. It's clear that the DOJ got wiretaps for F&F. That's part of their job. But it's not at a "clear" that the AG's office was aware that ATF wasn't properly tracking the weapons.

 

Like I said before, bureaucracies leave paper trails. We'll find out exactly what happened soon enough. I'm sure a few heads will roll. But I'm sure that it won't be enough to satisfy the people who want no ATF and no restrictions, whatsoever, on firearms transactions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. If the ATF in fact OK'd the sale of weapon to straw purchasers and then did not actively track those weapons it was wrong.

 

 

If? Deny reality much? Do you think the Inspector General's report is lying about this operation? That the various whistleblowers are lying? That the DOJ is stonewal...uh...investigating nothing at all?

 

 

Which IG report are you talking about? This one? What do you think it says about the "gunwalking" that purportedly happened in F&F?

 

The question is not whether ATF did that, since it is clear that they did. The question is not even whether their bosses at the Justice Department authorized it, since that is also clear now. The only remaining question really is how high up in the Justice Department did that authorization originate.

 

No it's not. It appears that at some point DOJ was contacted about F&F. But it's not at all "clear" what transpired in those contacts. A bunch of hearsay is not worth anything. It's clear that the DOJ got wiretaps for F&F. That's part of their job. But it's not at a "clear" that the AG's office was aware that ATF wasn't properly tracking the weapons.

 

Like I said before, bureaucracies leave paper trails. We'll find out exactly what happened soon enough. I'm sure a few heads will roll. But I'm sure that it won't be enough to satisfy the people who want no ATF and no restrictions, whatsoever, on firearms transactions.

 

The IG report does not specifically admit crimes, of course, but does contain interesting tidbits like this one:

 

One ICE Special Agent in Charge told us, “ATF

needs to recognize that [when] anything crosses that border in either

direction, we [iCE] have jurisdiction.” Another ICE agent referred to a

specific case in which ATF hoped to charge a suspect with smuggling

violations in an upcoming trial, but ICE had to decline the case referral from

ATF because the process of establishing smuggling violations takes much

longer than the time ATF allotted. He opined that, had ICE been involved

earlier, the smuggling case could have been developed and prosecuted.

 

What do you suppose ATF was doing to elicit that comment? How would they know about smuggling violations?

 

It has been the whistleblowers who talk directly about the gunwalking that "purportedly" happened.

 

From the emails, we know that ATF and a US Attorney named Emory met with a gun dealer, and we do know something about what happened at that meeting from those same emails. A bunch of hearsay? Lots of smoke for there to be no fire, it seems.

 

Will we really find out soon enough what happened here? Put another way, would you trust the Bush adminstration's Justice Department to investigate itself?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should official policy always reflect clandestine operations in foreign countries?

 

If it does not, how far up the chain of command should approval originate?

 

Another example of why it's pretty damn hard for US law enforcement to cooperate with the Mexican government.

 

You still think Mexico has a legitimate beef about being left out of the loop?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You still think Mexico has a legitimate beef about being left out of the loop?

 

I don't think there should have been any "loop" at all here. The whole gunwalking operation was a bad idea.

 

As far as legitimate operations, I agree with the IG and the Obama administration that better coordination with Mexican authorities and showing respect for them by communicating with them is a good policy.

 

If covert operations that circumvent that policy are needed, those are matters of international relations that should be approved at the highest levels. If I were President, I would not want some loose cannon out there pissing off other countries. That is why I find it hard to believe that Obama and/or Holder did not know about the gunwalking. Who else thinks they have the authority to screw with another country and violate our policies?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should official policy always reflect clandestine operations in foreign countries?

 

If it does not, how far up the chain of command should approval originate?

 

Top of the ATF. The head honcho. The big cheese. And he had damn well get Justice to sign off on it before he does it too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should official policy always reflect clandestine operations in foreign countries?

 

If it does not, how far up the chain of command should approval originate?

 

Top of the ATF. The head honcho. The big cheese. And he had damn well get Justice to sign off on it before he does it too.

 

Just anyone at Justice? I don't think a federal prosecutor should be making our foreign policy. I think the AG should go to the President with a decision like that. I'm guessing he did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should official policy always reflect clandestine operations in foreign countries?

 

If it does not, how far up the chain of command should approval originate?

 

Top of the ATF. The head honcho. The big cheese. And he had damn well get Justice to sign off on it before he does it too.

 

Just anyone at Justice? I don't think a federal prosecutor should be making our foreign policy. I think the AG should go to the President with a decision like that. I'm guessing he did.

 

Could be, but the presence of those two dead agents down there indicates some arraignment for US LE operations in Mexico was already in place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those were not ATF agents working in Mexico. One was a Border Patrol agent, and I think the other worked for ICE, IIRC. ATF has a Mexico Country Office (what a clunky name) but no one there seems to have known about the gunwalking. <_<

 

The fact that it "could be" that approval for this operation came from the top is what makes me think Congress needs to investigate.

 

The big question is: what did Obama/Holder know and when did they know it?

 

The fact that the administration has hired a spin doctor is further proof that Holder is not the man to answer that question, as if any more proof were needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those were not ATF agents working in Mexico. One was a Border Patrol agent, and I think the other worked for ICE, IIRC. ATF has a Mexico Country Office (what a clunky name) but no one there seems to have known about the gunwalking. <_<

 

The fact that it "could be" that approval for this operation came from the top is what makes me think Congress needs to investigate.

 

The big question is: what did Obama/Holder know and when did they know it?

 

The fact that the administration has hired a spin doctor is further proof that Holder is not the man to answer that question, as if any more proof were needed.

 

No more proof of what is needed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Analysis of ATF Field Manual on gunwalking

 

There are also practical considerations that may require bringing investigations to a conclusion or dictate a change in investigative tactics prior to the identification of persons directly affiliated with the DTOs. Examples include high volume trafficking investigations in which numerous diverted firearms identifiable with one or more purchasers are being used in violent crimes and recovered by law enforcement, and high volume trafficking investigations in which over an extended period ATF cannot reasonably determine where or to whom such firearms are being trafficked. SACs must closely monitor and approve such investigations, assessing the risks associated with prolonged investigation with limited or delayed interdiction. (Emphasis supplied, MBV.) In some instances, the best answer may be to provide actionable intelligence to other law enforcement agencies and/or the Government of Mexico.

 

Wabbit, why would the ATF field manual refer to large volumes of guns disappearing without being tracked unless that was happening?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Analysis of ATF Field Manual on gunwalking

 

There are also practical considerations that may require bringing investigations to a conclusion or dictate a change in investigative tactics prior to the identification of persons directly affiliated with the DTOs. Examples include high volume trafficking investigations in which numerous diverted firearms identifiable with one or more purchasers are being used in violent crimes and recovered by law enforcement, and high volume trafficking investigations in which over an extended period ATF cannot reasonably determine where or to whom such firearms are being trafficked. SACs must closely monitor and approve such investigations, assessing the risks associated with prolonged investigation with limited or delayed interdiction. (Emphasis supplied, MBV.) In some instances, the best answer may be to provide actionable intelligence to other law enforcement agencies and/or the Government of Mexico.

 

Wabbit, why would the ATF field manual refer to large volumes of guns disappearing without being tracked unless that was happening?

 

Why would a company refer to employees stealing company property in their employee handbook unless that was happening?

 

Make giant leaps of logic much?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Analysis of ATF Field Manual on gunwalking

 

There are also practical considerations that may require bringing investigations to a conclusion or dictate a change in investigative tactics prior to the identification of persons directly affiliated with the DTOs. Examples include high volume trafficking investigations in which numerous diverted firearms identifiable with one or more purchasers are being used in violent crimes and recovered by law enforcement, and high volume trafficking investigations in which over an extended period ATF cannot reasonably determine where or to whom such firearms are being trafficked. SACs must closely monitor and approve such investigations, assessing the risks associated with prolonged investigation with limited or delayed interdiction. (Emphasis supplied, MBV.) In some instances, the best answer may be to provide actionable intelligence to other law enforcement agencies and/or the Government of Mexico.

 

Wabbit, why would the ATF field manual refer to large volumes of guns disappearing without being tracked unless that was happening?

 

Why would a company refer to employees stealing company property in their employee handbook unless that was happening?

 

Make giant leaps of logic much?

 

Do any companies "closely monitor and approve" employee theft?

 

Make silly analogies much? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Analysis of ATF Field Manual on gunwalking

 

There are also practical considerations that may require bringing investigations to a conclusion or dictate a change in investigative tactics prior to the identification of persons directly affiliated with the DTOs. Examples include high volume trafficking investigations in which numerous diverted firearms identifiable with one or more purchasers are being used in violent crimes and recovered by law enforcement, and high volume trafficking investigations in which over an extended period ATF cannot reasonably determine where or to whom such firearms are being trafficked. SACs must closely monitor and approve such investigations, assessing the risks associated with prolonged investigation with limited or delayed interdiction. (Emphasis supplied, MBV.) In some instances, the best answer may be to provide actionable intelligence to other law enforcement agencies and/or the Government of Mexico.

 

Wabbit, why would the ATF field manual refer to large volumes of guns disappearing without being tracked unless that was happening?

 

The whole point of the program was to try to stem that from continuing Tom. You're not viewing that line in the manual as a sort of Freudian slip of a specific secret program, are you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Analysis of ATF Field Manual on gunwalking

 

There are also practical considerations that may require bringing investigations to a conclusion or dictate a change in investigative tactics prior to the identification of persons directly affiliated with the DTOs. Examples include high volume trafficking investigations in which numerous diverted firearms identifiable with one or more purchasers are being used in violent crimes and recovered by law enforcement, and high volume trafficking investigations in which over an extended period ATF cannot reasonably determine where or to whom such firearms are being trafficked. SACs must closely monitor and approve such investigations, assessing the risks associated with prolonged investigation with limited or delayed interdiction. (Emphasis supplied, MBV.) In some instances, the best answer may be to provide actionable intelligence to other law enforcement agencies and/or the Government of Mexico.

 

Wabbit, why would the ATF field manual refer to large volumes of guns disappearing without being tracked unless that was happening?

 

The whole point of the program was to try to stem that from continuing Tom. You're not viewing that line in the manual as a sort of Freudian slip of a specific secret program, are you?

 

 

 

 

If your boat is leaking, do you stem the flow by making the hole bigger?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Analysis of ATF Field Manual on gunwalking

 

There are also practical considerations that may require bringing investigations to a conclusion or dictate a change in investigative tactics prior to the identification of persons directly affiliated with the DTOs. Examples include high volume trafficking investigations in which numerous diverted firearms identifiable with one or more purchasers are being used in violent crimes and recovered by law enforcement, and high volume trafficking investigations in which over an extended period ATF cannot reasonably determine where or to whom such firearms are being trafficked. SACs must closely monitor and approve such investigations, assessing the risks associated with prolonged investigation with limited or delayed interdiction. (Emphasis supplied, MBV.) In some instances, the best answer may be to provide actionable intelligence to other law enforcement agencies and/or the Government of Mexico.

 

Wabbit, why would the ATF field manual refer to large volumes of guns disappearing without being tracked unless that was happening?

 

The whole point of the program was to try to stem that from continuing Tom. You're not viewing that line in the manual as a sort of Freudian slip of a specific secret program, are you?

 

 

 

 

If your boat is leaking, do you stem the flow by making the hole bigger?

 

Do you fish for tuna with tofu?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Issa Looking at Field Agent Holder

 

Issa reaffirmed his certainty that the decision to allow guns to “walk” into Mexico was one made in Washington, not in border cities or local ATF offices as DOJ officials have contended.

 

“We’re not done but what we do know is that the decision for this was not made in Tucson or El Paso or anywhere else,” he said. “It was made in Washington.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

Issa Looking at Field Agent Holder

 

Issa reaffirmed his certainty that the decision to allow guns to “walk” into Mexico was one made in Washington, not in border cities or local ATF offices as DOJ officials have contended.

 

“We’re not done but what we do know is that the decision for this was not made in Tucson or El Paso or anywhere else,” he said. “It was made in Washington.”

 

"Looks like Iran Contra"? Now that is interesting. As I recall, Reagan knew nothing about that.

 

By golly, the hunt is on for for the Ollie North in this now! What were they trading arms to drug lords for though? Drugs? Would that be juicy stuff for campaign season or what?

 

Pretty silly stuff, Tom. The head of the ATF and somebody in justice signed off on this plan, that is fairly assumable, but it's a leap to assume they conceived it, especially the lawyers in Justice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Issa Looking at Field Agent Holder

 

Issa reaffirmed his certainty that the decision to allow guns to "walk" into Mexico was one made in Washington, not in border cities or local ATF offices as DOJ officials have contended.

 

"We're not done but what we do know is that the decision for this was not made in Tucson or El Paso or anywhere else," he said. "It was made in Washington."

 

"Looks like Iran Contra"? Now that is interesting. As I recall, Reagan knew nothing about that.

 

By golly, the hunt is on for for the Ollie North in this now! What were they trading arms to drug lords for though? Drugs? Would that be juicy stuff for campaign season or what?

 

Pretty silly stuff, Tom. The head of the ATF and somebody in justice signed off on this plan, that is fairly assumable, but it's a leap to assume they conceived it, especially the lawyers in Justice.

 

Reagan knew, or should have known, how his minions were implementing foreign policy, and the same can be said of Obama.

 

Ollie was trading arms for drugs, this time they seem to have been trading guns for straw purchaser arrests and anti-gun propaganda, but perhaps there is more to it. In any case, the story probably won't be told during campaigns, any more than the story of what went on in Mena, Arkansas was told. <_<

 

This mysterious "somebody in Justice" sure is hard to find, isn't he? Perhaps because, once found, people will want to start asking that person why he was implementing his own foreign policy. I do not think anyone besides the President himself should be authorizing a program like this one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. The DEA found some "walked" guns in a drug bust, and now the ATF wants them.

 

Since then, sources say ATF and DEA have been in a tug of war over who should hold the weapons. The DEA is said to want to keep the weapons (and its own case) separate from ATF controversy. Today, the Dept. of Justice, which oversees DEA and ATF, provided no immediate comment or information.

 

Why would ATF want those weapons, I wonder? Maybe they will help to identify the elusive person at Justice who approved this ridiculous operation? :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. The DEA found some "walked" guns in a drug bust, and now the ATF wants them.

 

Since then, sources say ATF and DEA have been in a tug of war over who should hold the weapons. The DEA is said to want to keep the weapons (and its own case) separate from ATF controversy. Today, the Dept. of Justice, which oversees DEA and ATF, provided no immediate comment or information.

 

Why would ATF want those weapons, I wonder? Maybe they will help to identify the elusive person at Justice who approved this ridiculous operation? :rolleyes:

 

 

What does "keep them separate" mean Tom? Are they saying the do not want a complicated chain of custody problem in their case, or are they saying that they do not want the ATF to have them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. The DEA found some "walked" guns in a drug bust, and now the ATF wants them.

 

Since then, sources say ATF and DEA have been in a tug of war over who should hold the weapons. The DEA is said to want to keep the weapons (and its own case) separate from ATF controversy. Today, the Dept. of Justice, which oversees DEA and ATF, provided no immediate comment or information.

 

Why would ATF want those weapons, I wonder? Maybe they will help to identify the elusive person at Justice who approved this ridiculous operation? :rolleyes:

 

 

What does "keep them separate" mean Tom? Are they saying the do not want a complicated chain of custody problem in their case, or are they saying that they do not want the ATF to have them?

 

The article also uses the word "hold" with reference to the guns, so I think that answers your question. At least, that's how I interpret what she wrote.

 

Maybe someone other than CBS is covering this story, and you can find a corroborating link? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. The DEA found some "walked" guns in a drug bust, and now the ATF wants them.

 

Since then, sources say ATF and DEA have been in a tug of war over who should hold the weapons. The DEA is said to want to keep the weapons (and its own case) separate from ATF controversy. Today, the Dept. of Justice, which oversees DEA and ATF, provided no immediate comment or information.

 

Why would ATF want those weapons, I wonder? Maybe they will help to identify the elusive person at Justice who approved this ridiculous operation? :rolleyes:

 

 

What does "keep them separate" mean Tom? Are they saying the do not want a complicated chain of custody problem in their case, or are they saying that they do not want the ATF to have them?

 

The article also uses the word "hold" with reference to the guns, so I think that answers your question. At least, that's how I interpret what she wrote.

 

Maybe someone other than CBS is covering this story, and you can find a corroborating link? :lol:

 

We'll get the Black Helicopters right on that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh. The DEA found some "walked" guns in a drug bust, and now the ATF wants them.

 

Since then, sources say ATF and DEA have been in a tug of war over who should hold the weapons. The DEA is said to want to keep the weapons (and its own case) separate from ATF controversy. Today, the Dept. of Justice, which oversees DEA and ATF, provided no immediate comment or information.

 

Why would ATF want those weapons, I wonder? Maybe they will help to identify the elusive person at Justice who approved this ridiculous operation? :rolleyes:

 

 

What does "keep them separate" mean Tom? Are they saying the do not want a complicated chain of custody problem in their case, or are they saying that they do not want the ATF to have them?

 

The article also uses the word "hold" with reference to the guns, so I think that answers your question. At least, that's how I interpret what she wrote.

 

Maybe someone other than CBS is covering this story, and you can find a corroborating link? :lol:

 

We'll get the Black Helicopters right on that.

 

I think those are being used to ferry messages from NRA headquarters to their pet ATF agents regarding when to blow the whistle on stupid programs in order to best enhance dealer sales. At least, I assume the communication you imagine took place was covert, so why not helicopter messengers? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said before, bureaucracies leave paper trails. We'll find out exactly what happened soon enough. I'm sure a few heads will roll. But I'm sure that it won't be enough to satisfy the people who want no ATF and no restrictions, whatsoever, on firearms transactions.

 

Oh no! An army of strawmen who want no laws at all are coming? :o When do they get here? :lol:

 

Chronologically speaking, when is "soon enough" anyway? This thread has been up a couple of months now, and the scandal broke about 6 months ago. How many months should it take to learn a name?

 

In addition to the obvious conflict of interest problem with the Justice Department investigating itself, I'm starting to think there is also a competence problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's starting to get ugly...

 

A Republican aide on Issa’s committee this week said DOJ has since increased its level of assistance and has been more accommodating to the panel’s requests for documents and interviews with DOJ and ATF officials.

 

Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.), the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said. “We want to be sure that whatever investigation there is, is thorough, but that it does not interfere with Justice’s investigations.

 

“I think Justice has made reasonable efforts to extend themselves to us and ask us to work with them so that we can still get the information we want and at the same time they can protect their witnesses. I think the problem here is, is the question … How deeply is Justice itself implicated?” he added.

 

 

Good question, Elijah! Should Justice answer it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

At least The Hill began reporting some of this story with that article, months behind many other media sources. Have a look at what they were reporting when this thread was started.

 

No mention of the gun sales to repeat straw buyers, no mention of the guns disappearing in Mexico, no mention of the reappearance of one of those guns at Agent Terry's murder scene.

 

Just a diatribe pushing more "common sense" gun control and more ATF funding. Bias affects what we perceive as important, and I guess the ATF's misbehavior just does not seem all that important when you're busy explaining why they need more rules, more power, and more money (to solve a problem they are busy creating in the first place).

Link to post
Share on other sites