House moving to hold Holder in contempt - Washington Times

The House of Representatives is moving forward with proceedings to hold Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in contempt of Congress — a major escalation in the separation-of-powers battle over “Fast and Furious,” the Obama administration’s botched gun-walking operation.

 

Rep. Darrell E. Issa, California Republican and chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said his panel will take up the contempt issue next week, and the move has the blessing of House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican.

 

“The Justice Department is out of excuses,” Mr. Boehner said in a statement Monday morning. “Either the Justice Department turns over the information requested, or Congress will have no choice but to move forward with holding the Attorney General in contempt for obstructing an ongoing investigation.”

 

Both Mr. Holder and President Obama have acknowledged the operation — which allowed guns to be sold to straw purchasers in the U.S. with the knowledge they were being sent across the border to Mexican cartels — was wrong. But they said the operation was handled entirely by Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives employees, with little oversight at the Justice Department.

House committee schedules contempt vote against Holder - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

(CBS News) CBS News has learned the House Oversight Committee will vote next week on whether to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress. It's the fourth time in 30 years that Congress has launched a contempt action against an executive branch member.

 

This time, the dispute stems from Holder failing to turn over documents subpoenaed on October 12, 2011 in the Fast and Furious "gunwalking" investigation.

I haven't followed this issue very closely. Can someone summarize the issue for me.

 

What illegal activities took place? Any precedent for this type of action? Is the main issue against the DOJ and the Obama administration simply bad judgement or is there more to it?

 

What was the purpose of the gun sale? Surely there was an end goal here.

Allowed and encouraged sales of over 1000 guns to 'walkers' who worked for Mexican drug cartels. One of those guns killed border agent. Guns were supposed to be tracked but ther was viable tracking. As well as border agent guns have been linked to many Mexican civillian deaths.

 

Has been characterized as lower level op with no autherization from AG office.

Allowed and encouraged sales of over 1000 guns to 'walkers' who worked for Mexican drug cartels. One of those guns killed border agent. Guns were supposed to be tracked but ther was viable tracking. As well as border agent guns have been linked to many Mexican civillian deaths.

 

Has been characterized as lower level op with no autherization from AG office.

 

 

Am I correct that one of the purposes of putting the guns in the hands of certain members was to then track the guns to try to get the higher-ups of the cartel?

Had not really heard that specific angle.

 

The general 'goal' was to combat the supposed 'iron river' of firearms flowing across border.

 

Mexican government was not aware. Seems they would have been if cartle leaders were targets.

 

I have it that some lower level 'field officers' were going to tke fall and keep this out of AG office. Obvoiusly that did happen.

 

This is now the game of who was loop and when. Keeping it at AG level might be best case at this point.

Had not really heard that specific angle.

 

The general 'goal' was to combat the supposed 'iron river' of firearms flowing across border.

 

Mexican government was not aware. Seems they would have been if cartle leaders were targets.

 

I have it that some lower level 'field officers' were going to tke fall and keep this out of AG office. Obvoiusly that did happen.

 

This is now the game of who was loop and when. Keeping it at AG level might be best case at this point.

Had not really heard that specific angle.

 

.

 

From a memo from Rep Issa:

 

 

Fast and Furious Conceived

 

The ATF Phoenix Field Division began Operation Fast and Furious in the fall of 2009 after suspicious weapons purchases led agents to the discovery of an apparent Phoenix-based arms trafficking syndicate. Having been encouraged to devise grander strategies to stop the transfers of weapons to Mexican drug cartels, the Phoenix based agents devised a strategy that went beyond simple arrests or weapons confiscations. They would allow the U.S.-based associates of a Mexican drug cartel to continue acquiring firearms uninterrupted. In doing so, they hoped the weapons, after they were recovered at crime scenes in Mexico, could be traced and linked to cartel operatives including possible high-level financiers, suppliers, and possibly even king-pins.

 

The operation sought to achieve its lofty goals by focusing on the ringleader of the weapons smuggling syndicate they had identified: Manuel Celis-Acosta. Celis-Acosta was using a then-unknown number of straw-purchasers, including Jamie Avila, to purchase weapons.

 

Issa Report Again Debunks Right-Wing Media's Fast And Furious Conspiracy Theory | Media Matters for America

Both Holder and the President have acknowledged the operation was wrong. Holder failed to turn over subpoenaed documents. Not good.

Both Holder and the President have acknowledged the operation was wrong. Holder failed to turn over subpoenaed documents. Not good.

 

 

Wrong as in "bad judgement" or wrong as in "illegal?"

 

I thought I read today that they contend that the documents that have not been turned over are protected and not required.

Wrong as in "bad judgement" or wrong as in "illegal?"

 

I thought I read today that they contend that the documents that have not been turned over are protected and not required.

 

Illegal.

 

Mexican Laws

 

"The Department of State warns US citizens against taking any type of firearm or ammunition into Mexico without prior written authorization from the Mexican authorities. Entering Mexico with a firearm or a single round of ammunition carries a penalty of up to five years in jail, even if the firearm or ammunition is taken into Mexico unintentionally."

 

The DOJ intentionally allowed guns to be purchased by known walkers. They let well over a 1,000 of these transactions to occur. No a few, well over a thousand.

 

These ILLEGAL guns have killed Brian Terry, a US border patrol agent and have killed 100s in Mexico. This was done without the cooperation or knowledge of the Mexican government. Logistically, there was no viable 'tracking' method.

 

The DOJ was breaking not only US law but also Mexican law, knowingly and willfully. With knowledge of officials in Washington.

 

Some compare the stonewalling to Watergate (were 2 AGs went to jail for their acts of conspiracy). But in Watergate no one died.

Illegal.

 

Mexican Laws

 

"The Department of State warns US citizens against taking any type of firearm or ammunition into Mexico without prior written authorization from the Mexican authorities. Entering Mexico with a firearm or a single round of ammunition carries a penalty of up to five years in jail, even if the firearm or ammunition is taken into Mexico unintentionally."

 

The DOJ intentionally allowed guns to be purchased by known walkers. They let well over a 1,000 of these transactions to occur. No a few, well over a thousand.

 

These ILLEGAL guns have killed Brian Terry, a US border patrol agent and have killed 100s in Mexico. This was done without the cooperation or knowledge of the Mexican government. Logistically, there was no viable 'tracking' method.

 

The DOJ was breaking not only US law but also Mexican law, knowingly and willfully. With knowledge of officials in Washington.

 

Some compare the stonewalling to Watergate (were 2 AGs went to jail for their acts of conspiracy). But in Watergate no one died.

 

 

Are you saying that NOW you want the CIA/FBI/etc to follow all local laws? Are just going to disband the CIA?

Wrong as in "bad judgement" or wrong as in "illegal?"

 

I thought I read today that they contend that the documents that have not been turned over are protected and not required.

 

Didn't see where they detailed what they meant. My guess is both.

Edited June 12, 201214 yr by 75center

"The DOJ was breaking not only US law but also Mexican law, knowingly and willfully. With knowledge of officials in Washington." If true, combined with ignoring the court order to turn over documents, this could turn out very badly for Holder. Depending on how the president handles it he could also end up damaged.

From a memo from Rep Issa:

 

 

Fast and Furious Conceived

 

The ATF Phoenix Field Division began Operation Fast and Furious in the fall of 2009 after suspicious weapons purchases led agents to the discovery of an apparent Phoenix-based arms trafficking syndicate. Having been encouraged to devise grander strategies to stop the transfers of weapons to Mexican drug cartels, the Phoenix based agents devised a strategy that went beyond simple arrests or weapons confiscations. They would allow the U.S.-based associates of a Mexican drug cartel to continue acquiring firearms uninterrupted. In doing so, they hoped the weapons, after they were recovered at crime scenes in Mexico, could be traced and linked to cartel operatives including possible high-level financiers, suppliers, and possibly even king-pins.

 

The operation sought to achieve its lofty goals by focusing on the ringleader of the weapons smuggling syndicate they had identified: Manuel Celis-Acosta. Celis-Acosta was using a then-unknown number of straw-purchasers, including Jamie Avila, to purchase weapons.

 

Issa Report Again Debunks Right-Wing Media's Fast And Furious Conspiracy Theory | Media Matters for America

 

So this would be similar to, let's say, the NYPD providing meth to some supplier in the hopes of tracking it to a dealer in order to catch the dealer. Unfortunately before the dealer is caught, the supplied meth is used by a teenager who dies from an OD. You'd feel that the NYPD has no culpability in the teenager's death?

Are you saying that NOW you want the CIA/FBI/etc to follow all local laws? Are just going to disband the CIA?

 

The FBI - yes. They should follow the law since they enforce it.

 

The CIA? When did the CIA come into this? But the CIA used to be prohibited from operating inside the US borders. The CIA is the spooks where secret and yes, illegal activities occur. Hence why their domain was to be outside the US. This is why there was 'lack of sharing' that was identified after 9/11. It was by design. I have been concerned about the intermixing of the CIA and domestic law agencies since they announce 'better cooperation' after 9/11.

 

But the CIA is not who is in question here. DOJ/FBI/ATF ran a very bad 'sting' operation with tragic results and international consequences. They are trying to keep out of Holders office and out of the White House with 'plausible deniablity' that gets less plausible every day.