Actually Going After a Cartel

| June 21, 2012 | 22 Comments

Washington attorney and AT regular contributor, Clarice Feldman, did a masterful job of chopping Eric Holder and his politicized DoJ into mincemeat this past weekend for its many transgressions, with the Fast & Furious outrage being foremost in her article. What follows is an elaboration not on the details of the scandal but on the political motivation behind it.

When BATF agents first blew the whistle on what is now known as Operation Fast and Furious, the rationale offered by DoJ for such an evidently foolish operation was that it was designed to allow BATF to track and prosecute the leaders of the Mexican drug cartels. As more information surfaced from the Mexican government and the BATF’s Mexican bureau chief that none of them knew anything of this operation, many of us who were paying a bit closer attention to the case immediately smelled the first foul scent of corruption.

The fatal flaw in DoJ’s explanation was this: if the Mexican authorities had not been brought into the operation, nor even the BATF’s own agents authorized to operate in Mexico, then the proffered DoJ justification made utterly no sense, for the simple reason that once those walked guns hit the south side of that border there was absolutely no process in place to track them to their supposed targets. Therefore, DoJ was patently misrepresenting its motive. Why?

To those who keep a constant wary eye on the Left’s never-ending war on our 2d Amendment right to keep and bear arms, the increasingly fishy smell emanating from Washington led us to connect the dots back to the year-earlier revelations in the liberal media that weapons being used in Mexican crimes were traceable back to American sources more than 90% of the time. That false meme had spread quickly through the major liberal media along with calls for stricter gun control laws in this country by guess who? How about our president, our secretary-of-state, our attorney-general and other notable Democrats, for starters?

Here we had an operation mounted by the executive branch of the United States, an operation which had as its stated goal, after being outted that is, the targeting of Mexican drug lords on sovereign Mexican soil. Yet this was done without the knowledge of anyone in the Mexican government. Quite clearly, a secret and subversive operation had been conceived and implemented against our sister nation to the south; subversive because, again, quite clearly, the American government was subverting the sovereign authority of Mexico without that nation’s knowledge. If the goal was, as stated later by DoJ, to track guns into Mexico to the purchasing sources in the cartels, then was there not some diplomatic requirement to notify the Mexican government that we were arming their most violent criminal elements? And what was the need for keeping our own BATF agents in Mexico, the only American agents with Mexican authority to conduct such surveillance and tracking operations on Mexican soil, equally in the dark?

It doesn’t require much in the way of deductive powers to conclude that the fish wrap smell seeping out of Washington probably was due to the fact that Eric Holder’s Department of Justice was being used to tightly wrap something rotting from the head down. And what could that be? Early proponents of the theory suggesting that if the DoJ’s rationale smelled fishy then perhaps the true reason for F&F was to create justification for more gun control legislation here in this country, were looked at as crackpot conspiracists. Even now, most of those Republican members of Congress pursuing this scandal refuse to cite the true purpose of F&F, still referring to it as a bungled federal program. There are exceptions: Florida congressman, John Mica, speaking on one of the Sunday talk shows this weekend made clear his opinion that F&F was a sinister and cynical attempt by the Obama administration to undermine the 2d Amendment. I watched him say it but Google has no link. Imagine that.

For those who don’t really follow the gun ownership battle, here’s a five-step explanation:
1. Allow guns to flow freely to criminal elements in Mexico where they are naturally used in the extremely violent and deadly criminal activities of the drug cartels.
2. When sufficient guns of American origin have been used in such criminal activities, enlist the willing services of the liberal media to announce it to the world.
3. Enlist multiple prominent Democrats to untruthfully proclaim that 90% of the guns used in Mexican crimes originate in the U.S.
4. Use steps one through three to substantiate the liberal fallacy that private gun ownership leads to increased gun violence by gun owners.
5. With the compliance of a thoroughly duped American public, enact increasingly restrictive gun ownership policies through federal agencies, bypassing Congress and the Supreme Court.

When looked at this way, doesn’t Obama’s statement to a group of gun control advocates months earlier that he was taking steps to further gun control restrictions but “under the radar,” now seem less cryptic than it did at the time? For those who still don’t believe Fast & Furious was an end-run on the 2d Amendment by a liberal, gun-averse administration, here are five questions to consider:
1. Could the fact this plan was concocted at the very top of the administration, putting it on par with Watergate, explain Eric Holder’s entrenched refusal to release the tens of thousands of documents being sought by congressional investigators?
2. Is the liberal media’s refusal to investigate this scandal due to the fact they realize the truth of question one, that the acts of this administration may rise to criminal and impeachable offenses?
3. Has the reluctance of the Republican leadership to more aggressively support the House investigation been attributable to the same possibility, that full exposure could lead straight to the oval office and the politically unsavory possibility of impeachment of the nation’s first black president?
4. Does anyone really think an ambitious politician like Holder would risk career-ending contempt of congress charges to protect some incredibly stupid subordinates who supposedly, all by themselves, planned and implemented such a boondoggle?
5. In an administration known for its quickness in throwing friends and associates under the bus in matters of self-preservation, is it not remarkable that rather than being so dispatched by Holder, many of the key players in F&F have been promoted despite denials by their bureau?

If all this sounds a bit too much to swallow, consider the political origins of the key players in the current administration. All are products of the Chicago political machine, a thoroughly liberal/socialist/communist movement particularly hostile to the concept of citizen gun ownership as demonstrated by the some of the nation’s most restrictive gun ownership laws now in place there. And to prove the folly of those laws and the liberal fallacy that disarming the citizenry reduces crime, here’s a quite recent headline from that bastion of conservative thought and opinion, Huffington Post:

Chicago Homicide Rate Worse Than Kabul, Up To 200 Police Assigned To High-Profile Wedding (Video)

We are quick to blame the policies and activities of the Mexican drug cartels for their nation’s murder rate being among the highest in the world. Is it not then fair to apply the same blame to those who control a city with some of the most restrictive gun-ownership laws in America which are yielding gun-death fatality stats almost double the total casualty rate for American troops in the Afghan war zone? It is only the total and vice-like hold the Democrat machine has on Chicago that has made this city the riskiest place in America for law-abiding citizens, turning them into helpless, unarmed sheep at the mercy of roving, well-armed, predatory wolves.

Doesn’t Chicago sound a lot like Mexico to you?

Never lose sight of the real reason that liberals want to confiscate your guns. Liberals assert that government is the protector of all our freedoms and therefore we need not be concerned with protecting ourselves and our loved ones. The folly of that assertion can be refuted with one word: Chicago. But the true reason for wanting an unarmed public is that such a citizenry is powerless in the face of armed government and therefore compliant. Liberals and Democrats know full well that the key to unrestrained socialist governing is to first disarm the citizenry.

This administration has insisted that Fast and Furious was implemented solely to go after and bring down the leadership of the Mexican cartels. For those of you still unsure of the motivation of the Fast and Furious congressional investigation, would it make you more comfortable with that investigating committee’s legitimacy if you looked at it as an actual federal attempt to go after and bring down the leadership of a politically criminal cartel?

The Chicago Cartel?

Slightly edited version cross-posted at American Thinker.

Category: 2012 election, Barack Obama/Joe Biden

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Comments (23)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Brian says:

    Corruption, or laziness, carelessness,
    sloppiness and incompetence? Guns and
    drugs should never be allowed to walk,
    not under [any] circumstances.

  2. Brian says:

    Let guns flow freely to drug cartels in Mexico,
    while making war on Arizona. Yeah, that’ll work.

  3. COB6 says:

    Well done. The administration’s lies and help from a friendly media has reintroduced the word “botched” in modern political vernacular. It will always be associated with F&F. However there is not one single sliver of evidence to support the notion that this was a botched operation. In fact, as you pointed out above, there is ample evidence to conclude that this operation was being executed perfectly.

    I agree the Republican leaders are careful in going down that road against the 1st black president in history. But not just because it might turn into an impeachable offense. Many in DC think that what they have already been told by whistle blowers will, when confirmed, be a slam dunk for impeachment.

    Impeachment is ugly but conspiracy to commit murder is much worse and would result in far more than simple removal from office!

    Consider that by your reasoning stated above that I agree with, the guns going to Mexico and NOT being used to murder people would have rendered the whole operation useless.

    In your 5 step explanation above, you stated in #1 “deadly criminal activities”. Let’s call this murder.

    The whole operation hinged on murder and frankly the more the merrier.

    Because of this critical factor, what would the WH, DOJ and BATFE communications reveal that the planners behind this operation were doing to frame the battlespace to increase the likelyhood of more murders?

    Having many years experience in operational planning in the deadly arts, here are some factors I would consider:

    1. Ensure that the weapons “walked” were more lethal that the end user would likely face.
    2. Ensure that we had absolute intelligence that the weapons would go to the most lethal end user.
    3. Provide intelligence to the end user to ensure the murders were carried out efficiently.
    4. Establish some kind of liason within the end user’s camp to track numbers of murders and critical data such as women and children, clergy, 1st responders etc.

    And, if these idiots put any of that kind of operational detail in emails, game over!

  4. DR_BRETT says:

    OUTSTANDING Post, Mr. Poetrooper !!

    (Not easy to disentangle this mess, and to explain it !!)

    The Fishiness of it all !!

  5. Brian says:

    LOL, COB6, you just made my day.

  6. UpNorth says:

    COB6, if they did, in fact, put the info into e-mails back then, I’m reasonably certain they’ll take their chances on the crime of deleting emails, over murder, aiding and abetting murder and accessory to murder.

  7. Isnala says:

    The other thing hard to swallow: the AK-47 and its variants are THE most manufactured gun in the world and fully auto variants can be easily had for less than $100 a pop out side the US. The versions sold in the US are for the most part semi-auto and range from $500 to almost $1200. Now the Mexican Cartels are business people, violent ones a deadly and illegal product, but business non the less.

    So can someone riddle me this: why on earth someone would pay x5 to almost x12 times the cost plus go through the ‘hassle’ of smuggling them across the boarder when they can get them for $100 and less smuggling hassel/cost????

    -Ish

  8. PintoNag says:

    We are REALLY going to have a mess if this administration is allowed to stand for another four years. And our 2A rights will only be the start of it.

  9. UpNorth says:

    F & F isn’t the only thing gong on, http://www.examiner.com/article/alaska-gun-stores-say-atf-engaging-new-illegal-activity
    Seems the BATFE is also busy in the far North of our nation.

  10. UpNorth says:

    Duh, post too fast syndrome. “Only thing going on”, is what I meant to say

  11. PhillyandBCEagles says:

    #8, I’m not familiar with the economics of the international arms black market but if what you say is accurate–you’re assuming these particular purchases weren’t subsidized by the American taxpayer in the first place.

    #3, agree that this was on its way to working perfectly right up until Brian Terry got killed. They would’ve gotten away with this if those damn cartels had played their part and not used one of the weapons to kill a Border Patrol officer!

  12. ohio says:

    Obama to Sarah Brady :”I want you to know we are working on gun control under the radar.”
    I promise you he knew all about F&F.

  13. Dave says:

    Onlly one flaw in the above reasoning: Holder’s
    contempt charge will roll off this administration like water off the duck’s back. They don’t care, and like the F&F instigators who were tranferred and promoted, Holder will continue on in his present course and the administration will claim the contempt charge is a partisan political ploy.

  14. Brian says:

    @ @14 – The ramifications of this story are mind-boggling.
    It’s bigger than Watergate,or any other scandal. If the
    slimy low-lifes in the MSM weren’t playing dumb, ignoring
    it with criminal intent and covering for all of the chronic
    screw-ups in this slimy current administration, there would
    be a feeding frenzy already. If it goes away, we’re f*cked,

  15. DaveO says:

    Folks, F&F started a lot earlier than many people realize. There were 2 forerunners: one during the Bush-43 years, which was botched and ended in 2007. When the POTUS and his proxies blame Bush-43, they refer to this operation. There are unknowns, such as whether Bush-43 actually knew of this, but what is known is that the current Attorney General did lie about then-AG Mukasey’s involvement.

    Then there’s this: http://www.therightscoop.com/bombshell-proof-obama-and-holder-knew-about-gun-walking-in-2009/#comment-563238295

    Seems the POTUS and the few cabinet members he actually speaks to knew about the operation back in March of 2009.

    A few points to consider:

    An impeachment may be a slam dunk, but a conviction by the Senate is an impossibility, even were the GOP to have a majority. Remember, the Dems still have McCain, Grahamesty, the Maine Twins, Scott Brown and the senator from Illinois in their camp. But the Dems have the majority and will until January 2013. An impeachment and subsequent trial made a saint of Bill Clinton and no body, not even Dems want the POTUS canonized.

    The 2A says we have the right to keep and bear arms. There’s no right to sell arms, ammo and accessories – that’s all governed by the Commerce Clause which the SCOTUS defers exceptionally to the Congress and Executive branches. F&F was the pretext to go after gun sales. The POTUS could shut down all arms sales through the Dept of Commerce at any time, but he needed the pretext to give it the whiff of righteous indignation. And the SCOTUS would be hamstrung because the 2A isn’t touched at all.

    The fight in the SCOTUS today is whether the Commerce Clause can be used to force Americans to buy something simply because they are alive (Obamacare). Once that principle is established, it corollary of denying a thing is a given.

    Not all the weapons walked to Mexico. A number of the weapons have been found after the commission of crime in the US of A. In addition to 200+ dead Mexicans and 1 dead Brian Terry, there a number of very dead other Americans. We’ve forgotten them, along with hundreds of innocent Mexicans.

    AG Holder is alleged to have lied under oath to Congress. The last time Holder faced this much heat was when he sold a Presidential Pardon to Marc Rich in 2000. The AG likely already has a Presidential Pardon in his safe, aong with Big Sis and the POTUS’s coterie.

    The 200 cops assigned to protect a wedding in Chicago? The was the wedding of Valerie Jarrett’s daughter. She’s the billionaire Maoist advisor to the POTUS.

    And all of this, whether wedding or gun-walking or murder – all of was paid with your tax dollars. Thank you, thank you very much. May I have some more?

  16. OWB says:

    Can’t really blame them for trying to sequentially sweep this under the rug, ignore any and all attempts to investigate, lie about it, buy time to manufacture whatever they need to obfuscate future investigations, pretend it didn’t happen, lie about it some more, then finally claim executive privilege for something about which the executive is alleged to have no knowledge. It’s all simply variations upon a theme.

    And it manages to take the spotlight off whatever it is that they are doing behind the curtain this week.

  17. WOTN says:

    Poe, I remember and was thinking recently about the multiple articles in WaPo and other news agencies about how US sold guns were involved in Mexican drug violence. I’m glad to see the public reminded of that aspect, and how that “fact” was being used in order to call for tighter US gun laws, including calls from Mexican President Vicente Fox for tighter US gun laws.

    While I don’t believe the murder of a US agent in Mexico was part of “the plan,” I don’t think it was viewed as a negative for those that wanted cries for tighter gun laws. I believe they initially thought it would increase support for tighter US gun laws, and failed to consider that it would provide motivation to agents in the know to blow the whistle.

    It is time for the case to be brought to the American People. It is time for those agents in the know to tell their stories to the voting public. I don’t know all the facts, and I do have a high bar for what should justify impeachment proceedings. It should never be used as a political tool, and even if there is sufficient grounds for impeachment on hand, this is not the time to initiate such proceedings. This is the time to bring the case to the American People.

  18. OWB says:

    Interesting that a friend just sent this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FD2vLipBvuA&feature=player_embedded

    Even though it’s an older video, it is (unfortunately) quite timely.

  19. streetsweeper says:

    Funny thing here is, if it hadn’t been for Mike Vanderboegh and his Sipsy Street Irregulars blog, none of this would have ever come to see the light of day. Bigger than Watergate my ass…Something tells me we’ve never seen such a fiasco as this one before in the past, present or future. Keep an eye on old Mexico, people. This one is very far from over.

  20. Brian says:

    Dave @ #16 – It’s my understanding that both of the Bush Administration’s versions of “Fast And Furious” worked pretty effectively, and it wasn’t until the chronic screw-ups in the Obama Administration took over control of operations that everything went haywire. Did I miss something?

    A related issue is that last night on MSNBC, Al Sharpton made the preposterous allegation that, with respect to this fiasco, the Holder and Obama were deliberately “set up” by G.W.Bush himself, and Fox’s Juan Williams pursued that irresponsible line of thinking by insinuating that, with respect to this fiasco, also, it’s racism and G.W.Bush is out to get Holder and Obama because they are black. MSNBC is picking up that theme with [their] talking points, too. < No surprise there.

  21. Brian says:

    We’re seeing a pattern here. When the Bush Administration
    left office, the Middle East was stabilized. Since the
    chronic screw-ups in the Obama Administration came into
    office, the Middle East has become completely destabilized.
    They’ve been a disaster, both overseas and domestically.
    But hey, let’s give them four more years. It’s so cool to
    have our first black AG and our first black POTUS, too.

  22. Brian says:

    BTW, Congresswoman Michelle Bachman pointed out on
    C-SPAN yesterday that, for political reasons and
    not for national security reasons, Obama consults
    with Axelrod on who to single out on his Hit List
    for assasination. This is unprecedented. Axelrod
    is not a national security advisor. What amateurs.
    What bumbling, incompetent twits. God help us!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *