« Gallup: Obama's Approval Falls to 43% |
Main
|
Pan Left: Aaron Sorkin's New Preachy Liberal Fantasia Is Just As Preachy A Liberal Fantasia As You'd Expect, Say... Liberal Reviewers »
June 21, 2012
Brit Hume: Obama's Executive Privilege Claim Has the "Stench of Cover-Up"
And this Investors Business Daily editorial agrees.
Back in February 2011, Assistant Attorney General Ron Welch, in response to the investigations by Rep. Issa and Sen. Chuck Grassley of the Fast and Furious gun-"walking" program run out of ATF's Phoenix office, wrote a letter stating that the "allegation that ATF 'sanctioned' or otherwise knowingly allowed the sale of assault weapons ... is false."
Later, Deputy Attorney General Cole, in another letter to Congress, wrote: "Facts have come to light during the course of this investigation that indicate the Feb. 4 letter contains inaccuracies." In other words, the Department of Justice lied to Congress. The cover-up continues with the invocation of executive privilege.
Committee member Rep. Patrick Meehan, R-Pa., spoke in written remarks about the active intimidation of ATF agents and potential witnesses in the Fast and Furious probe by high officials at the Department of Justice. As we have reported, some ATF agents have already testified that Fast and Furious and its variants were no accident.
"Allowing loads of weapons that we knew to be destined for criminals — this was the plan," ATF Agent John Dodson told Issa's committee. "It was so mandated." ATF agent Olindo James Casa said that "on several occasions I personally requested to interdict or seize firearms, but I was always ordered to stand down and not to seize the firearms."
Fast and Furious has become worse than Watergate. No one died at Watergate. Just what is in those documents that Obama and Holder so desperately want to hide? Brian Terry's family and the American people deserve answers.
A third-rate gun-running operation?
The claim from the left is that this is just a case of "criminalizing policy differences."
But that's absurd. Does either wing of American politics support giving assault weapons to Mexican druglords?
I didn't think either did, but if it's "policy differences" we're criminalizing, that's the policy difference in question.
And, as a matter of fact: Selling guns to Mexican drug lords is criminal.
So is the United States' government's involvement in the murders of 200+ Mexicans and two Americans.