Skip to comments.
Issa to Holder: You Own Operation Fast and Furious
| October 10, 2011
| Katie Pavlich
Posted on 10/10/2011 1:27:12 PM PDT by Kaslin
Chairman of the House Oversight Committe Darrell Issa has sent Attorney General Eric Holder a letter in response to a combative letter sent by Holder late Friday afternoon defending his "truthful and accurate" Congressional testimony from May 3, 2011.
Whether you realize yet or not, you own Fast and Furious. It is your responsibility.
In the letter, Issa isn't buying Holder's latest excuses for "not knowing" about Operation Fast and Furious or the tactics used in the lethal program, saying Holder has reached a disappointing new low.
From the beginning of the congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furious, the Department of Justice has offered a roving set of ever-changing explanations to justify its involvement in this reckless and deadly program. These defenses have been aimed at undermining the investigation. From the start, the Department insisted that no wrongdoing had occurred and asked Senator Grassley and me to defer our oversight responsibilities over its concerns about our purported interference with its ongoing criminal investigations. Additionally, the Department steadfastly insisted that gunwalking did not occur.
Once documentary and testimonial evidence strongly contradicted these claims, the Department attempted to limit the fallout from Fast and Furious to the Phoenix Field Division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). When that effort also proved unsuccessful, the Department next argued that Fast and Furious resided only within ATF itself, before eventually also assigning blame to the U.S. Attorney's Office in Arizona. All of these efforts were designed to circle the wagons around DOJ and its political appointees.
To that end, just last month, you claimed that Fast and Furious did not reach the upper levels of the Justice Department. Documents discovered through the course of the investigation, however, have proved each and every one of these claims advanced by the Department to be untrue. It appears your latest defense has reached a new low. Incredibly, in your letter from Friday you now claim that you were unaware of Fast and Furious because your staff failed to inform you of information contained in memos that were specifically addressed to you. At best, this indicates negligence and incompetence in your duties as Attorney General. At worst, it places your credibility into serious doubt.
Your letter dated October 7 is deeply disappointing. Instead of pledging all necessary resources to assist the congressional investigation in discovering the truth behind the fundamentally flawed Operation Fast and Furious, your letter instead did little but obfuscate, shift blame, berate, and attempt to change the topic away from the Department's responsibility in the creation, implementation, and authorization of this reckless program.
Meanwhile, new subpoenas will be making their way to Holder's desk within the week.
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: atf; banglist; castaway; cia; clinton; dea; dhs; doj; fastandfurious; fbi; gunrunner; gunwalker; hillary; holder; ice; obama
posted on 10/10/2011 1:27:17 PM PDT
Take the US Marshals office down to Holders office and lock the CS up.
posted on 10/10/2011 1:32:08 PM PDT
Obama is the accomplice to the murders committed with Fast and Furious weapons
Let's go back to one of the first articles hinting at the problem.
Over a barrel?
Meet White House gun policy adviser Steve Croley
By Jason Horowitz
On March 15, two months after a deadly shooting spree in Tucson left a U.S. congresswoman in critical condition,
the nations leading gun-control activists took seats in Room 4525 at the Department of Justice to push the Obama administration for more firearm regulation.
In the hour-and-a-half-long meeting, Assistant Attorney General Christopher H. Schroeder, who has coordinated the governments work on the issue,
went around a long conference table soliciting views from representatives of the major advocacy and law enforcement groups.
But the official the advocates wanted to hear from most stayed mostly quiet.
The silence of Steve Croley, the White Houses point man on gun regulation policy, echoes the decision by Democrats to remain mute on guns as a national issue, even in the wake of the Tucson rampage.
Croleys keep-your-head-down approach is in keeping with President Obamas preference for low-key wonks, but in this case, his reticence has more to do with political reality:
Democrats have no plans for serious gun-control initiatives, and the Gabrielle Giffords tragedy, as heart-rending as it was, hasnt changed their minds.
The result for Croley is a tree-falls-in-the-woods conundrum:
If President Obama, like just about every leading Democrat, has abandoned the issue, does the administrations gun policy even exist?Croley is undeniably present, but he doesnt make a sound.
The buzz-cut gun owner with sharp cheekbones and a genius for regulatory law is, according to multiple advocates, on a listening tour.
Activists with whom Croley has conferred described him as enigmatic, though their conversations have yielded certain strong impressions.
Croley, who since August has been Obamas 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.
His background in administrative law has especially prepared him for figuring out
how state agencies can make their records readily available to a federal gun database.
One area in which Croley has shown less interest, according to several people who have spoken with him about the issue,
is restricting the large-volume ammunition magazines that allowed the Tucson shooter to keep firing.
When Paul Helmke, director of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, broached the subject during the March 15 gathering with Croley,
officials promptly adjourned the meeting.
Croley, who characteristically declined to speak for this article, has a broad portfolio
including good government and transparency issues, civil rights, food safety and criminal justice policy.
Guns have accounted for only a small part of his workload, and its an issue with which he has little experience.
But Croleys friends and colleagues describe the 45-year-old University of Michigan legal scholar
as an extraordinary man of catholic interests and talents.
In fact, its hard to imagine a more presentable face for the administration to spotlight on the gun issue.
Croley grew up hunting deer with his father in DeWitt, outside Lansing, Mich., and went on to attend Yale Law School.
He founded a boxing club, and was known to hand out black eyes and swollen lips.
Hed take down guys 40, 50 pounds heavier than him,said Robert Riley, a friend at Yale and the son of former Alabama governor Bob Riley.
A newsletter at Berkeley Law School, where Croley taught in 2000, advised new students to add the jazz pianists Steven Croley Trio
to their CD collection and to relax and enjoy drinks at Yoshis with this consummate pianist and tort therapist.
This fall, he will preview a documentary about Dutch farmers and gay residents in Saugatuck, Mich.,
that he made with his wife, Bridget M. McCormack.
(She has a D.C.-Hollywood insider in her family: Her sister is actress Mary Catherine McCormack,
who played deputy national security adviser Kate Harper in The West Wing and Mary Matalins blond associate in HBOs K Street.)
Croley himself has movie-star good looks.
In 2006, the irreverent legal blog Above the Law named him a finalist in its Law School Dean Hotties contest.
(Steven Croley is THE Tom Cruise look-alike.)
More relevant to his current brief, Croleys theoretical perspective of law has steadily shifted to the the nuts and bolts of how things work,
according to his friend and University of Michigan colleague Kyle D. Logue.
Croley has moonlighted as a special assistant U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan
and is now widely cited on regulation and tort law.
That reputation for pragmatism hit a snag in 2002 when his fingers were mangled in a snowblower accident.
He had disregarded the warning label, and he became an on-campus case study:
If one of the countrys leading tort scholars fails to heed an advisory label, professors posited, do such warnings carry any weight?
Its just that sort of question about the role of regulation on dangerous products that has informed Croleys approach to the gun issue.
If you think of guns as the intersection of regulatory policy and torts, to work on gun policy, said Roderick Hills, a law professor at New York University and an old friend of Croleys.
then nothing makes more sense than a professor specializing in regulation policy and torts
He suggested that if the Supreme Courts interpretation of the Second Amendment shaped a keyhole for regulation,
Croleys job is to make a skeleton key that fits that keyhole.
Hes the right guy, Hills said.
The National Rifle Association, the powerful opponent to any gun restrictions, has yet to make Croleys acquaintance.
He has had zero interaction with us,said Andrew Arulanandam, the NRAs director of public affairs.
One reason for that lack of interaction:
The NRA turned down an invitation to the March 15 session that Croley attended.
In recent meetings, Croley has been less revealing about his views of regulation
than he was in his 2008 book Regulation and Public Interests: The Possibility of Good Regulatory Government.
In this tome, Croley writes,
The evolution of the regulatory state has not been gradual,
but rather reflects accelerated growth in response to periods of crisis and national trauma.
In this light, regulation seems not only ubiquitous but inevitable.
But in Obamas Washington, national trauma does not lead inevitably to reform.
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D) of New York, who lost her husband in the 1993 shooting massacre on the Long Island Rail Road,
recalled a meeting in 2008 with Croley when he served on Obamas transition team.
Basically it was me doing all the talking, and you know what?
I probably didnt know who the guy was, she said.
That didnt make any difference; it was somebody from the White House.
McCarthy and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D) of New Jersey offered a bill that would ban the clips that hold large volumes of ammunition.
The pugnacious McCarthy said that
if the administration continued to stay on the sidelines, she and Lautenberg would get the job done themselves,but added that she certainly had higher hopes with the administration.
Lautenberg attempted to express optimism. The senator recalled that Attorney General Eric Holder visited him on March 29
and tried to give us his assurance to help us with the legislation.
During his campaign, Obama supported
reintroducing the lapsed assault weapon ban, Since taking office, the president has done none of that, and before the midterm elections,
promised to eliminate an amendment requiring the FBI to destroy records of gun buyers background checks
and advocated closing the gun-show loophole.
he shelved a proposal requiring gun dealers to report bulk sales of high-powered semiautomatic rifles.
In his State of the Union address, just weeks after the Giffords shooting in January, Obama made no mention of guns.
On March 13, the president wrote an Arizona Daily Star opinion piece that suggested his support for closing the gun-show loophole
but made no mention of restricting large clips.
Other leading Democrats, even those traditionally willing to offer full-throated support for gun-control efforts,
have grown surprisingly less vocal as they take on more of a national role.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat and close friend of Giffordss, is moving up to become the Democratic National Committee chairman.
She declined to comment.
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.
In the meeting, she said, Obama discussed how records get into the system and what can be done about firearms retailers.
Her husband specifically brought up the proposed ban on large magazine clips,
and she noted that even former vice president Dick Cheney had suggested that some restrictions on the clips might make sense.
He just laughed, Sarah Brady said approvingly of the president.
Both she and her husband, she emphasized, had absolute confidence that the president was committed to regulation.
In simpler, pre-administration times, so was the presidents point man.
In Croleys book, he argued that for all the healthy skepticism,
in a complex world, regulation still amounted to the least-worst solution to pressing social problems.
posted on 10/10/2011 1:33:07 PM PDT
(It's simple: Fight or Die)
And ... what did Obama know, and when did he know it?
posted on 10/10/2011 1:33:42 PM PDT
(This too shall pass ...)
On word: I M P E A C H M E N T
posted on 10/10/2011 1:42:10 PM PDT
(Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
The day the
Communists IMPEACH Obama
is the day they might stand a chance at winning reelection.
posted on 10/10/2011 1:45:38 PM PDT
(It's simple: Fight or Die)
Thank you God for Daryl Issa. Someone has to be a man and stand tall for this country. We cannot continue to allow laws and rules to be broken anytime the supposed leaders decide to do so. If we get everyone to pay with the consequences of their actions from the President on down to the average Joe... our country will get back on track and laws will be followed and respected and things will right themselves once again.
Had to laugh at the protestor who said he ate better at the protest than he did at his parents. There’s the whole answer right there. Living with his parents at 26 years old, unemployed and not only getting free, expensive food but saying it is BETTER thatn what he gets at his parents. Amazing. Why isn’t he out working paying his own rent and buying his own food?
Here is a protestor getting free expensive food while mocking others. There are people out there busting their butts to put SOME FOOD...ANY FOOD on the table for their families and this idiot makes a statement like he does. Sit him down and try to have an intelligent back and forth debate about something and see how that goes.
God forgive those who are trying to destroy this great country. God forgive them.
posted on 10/10/2011 1:59:59 PM PDT
(Rush Limbaugh... where would our country be without this brilliant man?)
Thank you for the great post.
posted on 10/10/2011 2:18:01 PM PDT
by Buffalo Head
(Illigitimi non carborundum)
Issa needs to hire a couple bodyguards.
I fear for him.
posted on 10/10/2011 2:44:28 PM PDT
Any bets on whether or when Obama leaves Holder “twisting, slowly, slowly in the wind” over this?
Or does Holder know where too many of the bodies are buried?
posted on 10/10/2011 2:44:56 PM PDT
("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
Lying to Congress is perjury. We have some laws left.
A major league pitcher was indicted for lying under oath.
Yes we can...and yes he does!!!
Careful, there, Eric. Screw with Congress and they'll ship your sorry butt down to Fort Jefferson in the Dry Tortugas to air out your contempt-of-Congress underwear. You'll cure your attitude -- if you can -- or you'll spend more years down there than Dr. Mudd.
posted on 10/11/2011 12:41:40 AM PDT
(Concealed carry is a pro-life position.)
Issa needs to hire a couple bodyguards.
That's a point. I've been thinking the same thing about Sarah Palin and a number of prominent black conservatives like Prof. Sowell and Justice Thomas, who embarrass Obozo and his "boogie society/high ghetto-trash" act just by standing up and being recognized.
posted on 10/11/2011 12:45:46 AM PDT
(Concealed carry is a pro-life position.)
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson