You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
The Fast and Furious scandal is turning into President Obama's Watergate
2012-06-21
Fast and furious hasn’t been discussed a lot in the mainstream media, which is why the facts can seem so preposterous when you read them for the first time. But the story is slowly unraveling and the public is catching up with the madness. On Wednesday, the The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt over his decision to withhold documents related to the “gun walking” operation – documents that President Obama tried to keep secret by invoking executive privilege. The question of why the Prez intervened in this way will surely hang over the investigation and the White House for many months to come. Be patient, conservatives. It took nearly eight months for the Watergate break in to become a national news story. But when it finally did, it toppled a President.

Here’s what Fast and Furious is all about – and for the uninitiated, be prepared for a shock. In 2009, the US government instructed Arizona gun sellers illegally to sell arms to suspected criminals. Agents working for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) were then ordered not to stop the sales but to allow the arms to “walk” across the border into the arms of Mexican drug-traffickers. According to the Oversight Committee’s report, “The purpose was to wait and watch, in hope that law enforcement could identify other members of a trafficking network and build a large, complex conspiracy case…. [The ATF] initially began using the new gun-walking tactics in one of its investigations to further the Department’s strategy. The case was soon renamed ‘Operation Fast and Furious.”

Tracing the arms became difficult, until they starting appearing at bloody crime scenes. Many Mexicans have died from being shot by ATF sanctioned guns, but the scandal only became public after a US federal agent, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, was killed by one of them in a fire fight. ATF whistle blowers started to come forward and the Department of Justice was implicated. ItÂ’s estimated that the US government effectively supplied 1,608 weapons to criminals, at a total value of over $1 million. Aside from putting American citizens in danger, the AFT also supplied what now amounts to a civil war within Mexico.

It’s important to note that the Bush administration oversaw something similar to Fast and Furious. Called Operation Wide Receiver, it used the common tactic of “controlled delivery,” whereby agents would allow an illegal transaction to take place, closely follow the movements of the arms, and then descend on the culprits. But Fast and Furious is different because it was “uncontrolled delivery,” whereby the criminals were essentially allowed to drop off the map. Perhaps more importantly, Wide Receiver was conducted with the cooperation of the Mexican government. Fast and Furious was not.

So ObamaÂ’s operation is subtly different. But just as concerning is the heavy handed way that the administration has handled criticism. Obama says that the Oversight Committee has been hi-jacked by Republicans who would rather talk about politics than creating jobs (because Obama is o-so very good at generating those). But there has been Democratic criticism too, and the PrezÂ’s determined defence of Holder will only encourage conspiracy thinking that the scandal has hidden depths. Executive privilege is usually associated with protecting information that passes through the Oval Office. What did the documents reveal about ObamaÂ’s association with the operation?

Again, itÂ’s important to contextualise. Executive privilege has been invoked 24 times since Ronald Reagan, and attempts to over-ride it rarely reach the courts. Moreover, HolderÂ’s request for executive privilege made no reference to White House involvement in Fast and Furious, which seems to have been run exclusively by the ATF. Nevertheless, by refusing to sack Holder or push him to come clean, Obama may have made a very Nixonian mistake.

A lot of conservatives are writing at the moment that not only is Obama turning into Nixon Mark II, but Obama is much worse because no one actually got killed during Watergate. The comparison is based on the myth that Nixon ordered the Watergate break in and that’s what he eventually had to resign over. But that’s not true. Nixon’s guilt was in trying to pervert the course of justice by persuading the FBI to drop its investigation of the crime. Mistake number one, then, was to involve the White House in covering up the errors of a separate, autonomous political department. Mistake number two was that when Congress discovered that evidence about the scandal might be recorded on the White House bugging system, Nixon invoked executive privilege to protect the tapes. In both cases, it was the cover up that destroyed Tricky Dick – not the original crime.

And, forty years later almost to the day, here we have Obama making the same mistake. Perhaps itÂ’s an act of chivalry to stand by Holder; perhaps itÂ’s an admission of guilt. Either way, it sinks the Oval Office ever further into the swamp that is Fast and Furious. Make no mistake about: Fast and Furious was perhaps the most shameful domestic law and order operation since the Waco siege. ItÂ’s big government at its worst: big, incompetent and capable of ruining lives.
Posted by:Beavis

#12  DHS officials kept saying that 90% of the cartel guns hailed from the USA

They were, but not from private dealers. They were weapons originally sold/provided to the Mexican military. Coercing private dealers to sell to the cartels was an Obamanistic innovation.

The 'forty years to the day' thing makes me fear we are caught in some sort of time loop. It's like having our own private Nixon to kick around.
Posted by: SteveS   2012-06-21 23:22  

#11  even in the Bush Admin DHS officials kept saying that 90% of the cartel guns hailed from the USA. My colleagues and I we're highly skeptical. The Administration of Barack Chavez Obama took it a quantum leap further by trying to prove the 90% to clamp down on the 2nd Amendment. Sort of sounds like what 60 Minutes does...search high and low for odd pieces to support a premise and present it as fact.
Posted by: jack salami   2012-06-21 22:23  

#10  Richard - that appears to have ALWAYS been the objective: dead Mexicans - US Weapons - Cut down on weapons here. It was just clumsy and stupidly applied...note: without (!) Joe Biden. This is on his level of strategic planning
Posted by: Frank G   2012-06-21 22:19  

#9  Where's Woodturd and Bernlean when you re4ally need em?
Posted by: jack salami   2012-06-21 22:15  

#8  One blogger--can't recall which--suggested that, if the purpose was to gin up outrage to support some kind of gun rights rollback, the project needed dead Mexicans. No dead Mexicans, no outrage.
We have dear friends in Mexico, and I'm feeling too ashamed to talk to them.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey   2012-06-21 21:01  

#7  too bad this asshat won't resign like nixon
Posted by: chris   2012-06-21 16:35  

#6  An interesting summary of F & F from Canada Free Press
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-06-21 16:16  

#5  No one died in Watergate. F&F gunrunning to undermine the 2nd Amendment.
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-06-21 15:35  

#4  Mistake number one, then, was to involve the White House in covering up the errors of a separate, autonomous political department. Mistake number two was that when Congress discovered that evidence about the scandal might be recorded on the White House bugging system, Nixon invoked executive privilege to protect the tapes. In both cases, it was the cover up that destroyed Tricky Dick -- not the original crime.


However, everyone learned from those mistakes of 40 years ago and technology has evolved beyond tape recordings. The Oval Office isn't as secure apparently assumed.
Posted by: OmuluqueHapsburg5085   2012-06-21 15:09  

#3  So transparency is in the eyes of the beHOLDER?
Posted by: Bill Clinton   2012-06-21 13:44  

#2  So Obama's operation is subtly different.

Subtly different? I'd say these were pretty substantial differences.
Posted by: MW   2012-06-21 12:16  

#1  If the reporting were any better, he'd have 20 Watergates by now.
Posted by: Iblis   2012-06-21 11:54  

00:00