Originally Posted By shrikefan:
So now it is starting to make sense as to why obama didn't make any attempts at gun control in the beginning of his administration.

(CBS News) The White House said a former National Security staffer who communicated with ATF's Special Agent in charge of "Fast and Furious" cannot be interviewed by Congressional investigators.
The ATF Special Agent, Bill Newell, testified to Congress in July 2011 that he's a longtime friend with then-White House National Security Staffer Kevin O'Reilly. The two emailed and talked on the phone during the controversial Fast and Furious gunwalking operation, according to documents and Newell's testimony to Congress.

In one email exchange about Fast and Furious on Feb. 11, 2011 O'Reilly asked Newell, "Would ATF be willing to put you or others in front of US media that gets pickup in Mexico (CNN en Espanol, perhaps) to tell this story?"

At the time, the Justice Department and ATF were denying any gunwalking had occurred, and were looking for ways to promote stories about gun traffickers buying weapons in the U.S. and taking them to Mexico.

"Kevin as we discussed last night," answered Newell, "these are some examples of what we could get translated and use in the Mexican media . . . The 'Fast and Furious' indictment is listed under 'U.S. v Avila.'"

The two also emailed about the case in July 2010, exchanging anecdotes and photographs of gun seizures in the case.

Kevin O'reilly emails (PDF)

Originally Posted By Everrest:
Looks like we won't be getting it from him.
CBSNews: W.H.: Ex-staffer can't be questioned on Fast and Furious
More at link.

Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:


I've been thinking about the Mexican angle of this a bit. We don't know the exact number of Mexican citizens killed by the F&F guns, but it's a fair assumption to say the number is much higher than US citizens killed. With that in mind, what recourse do those affected have?

I am not a fan of the UN or the International Criminal Court, because I believe that the US Constitution should trump international law, but at the same time, that doesn't account for corrupt administrations that subvert the Constitution or ignore it to carry out operations such as F&F. I think the families affected should have the right to pursue justice, but I also worry that it might open the door to rationalize the need for the US to become party to the ICC. So where does that leave us, and more importantly, those Mexican families that were victims as much at Brian Terry's family?

Originally Posted By Kevyn:


...............................

The one thing that does sorta make sense here is the Second Amendment angle. U.S. acquired guns used in crimes, easily traced to straw purchasers, lets clamp down on gun sales. But the ATF got what they wanted anyway ...immediate reporting of multiple sales, without going through the legislature. So why go through all the machinations? Why not just enact through bureaucratic fiat, a restriction on gun sales? They did that, they didn't 'NEED' to use straw buyers and manipulate data to achieve their purpose.

..........................

Originally Posted By hugh1:
Mexican authorities put it at over 200 dead with F&F weapons. No numbers for DGS weapons but surely much higher and IF equivalent % wise over 4,000 murdered.

Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:


Ok, so I don't think it's just to those families to ignore their losses, so what recourse do they have? I can't see this administration offering an apology or compensation or anything that might be held up as a reason to hold them accountable on this side of the border, so what options do they have? Would they be able to sue for damages here?

Originally Posted By hugh1:
Isn't that what we did after 911

Originally Posted By RDak:


Yes, and I edited my post to add that I would not be able to argue with a Mexican citizen who concluded this was akin to an act of war.

What could I say to that Mexican citizen to convince him it wasn't an act of war? I would need help on that one.

President Barack Obama may have actually asserted executive privilege once before to protect Attorney General Eric Holder from congressional scrutiny, documents and congressional records obtained by The Daily Caller indicate.

During Holder’s 2009 confirmation hearings, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn pressed Holder for details on the role he played in helping get Puerto Rican terrorists — members of the violent Armed Forces for National Liberation, who set off 120 bombs throughout the U.S. killing at least six Americans and permanently harming others — clemency during the Bill Clinton administration.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Holder drafted an “options memo” that allowed Clinton to grant commutations to the terrorists in the late 1990s when several high-ranking Department of Justice officials opposed the move. That options memo effectively facilitated clemency for those terrorists. Holder went against the DOJ’s Pardon Attorney Roger Adams’ “strong opposition to any clemency in several internal memos and a draft report recommending denial” and pushed to get the terrorists’ sentences commuted.
Fast-forward to shortly after President Barack Obama was elected. He had nominated Holder to be the United States Attorney General and Cornyn was pressing him to testify about the details of those FALN terrorist commutations. When asked to testify about the options memo, Holder claimed under oath in the congressional record that he was “not authorized” to do so.
....snip....
Fast-forward to shortly after President Barack Obama was elected. He had nominated Holder to be the United States Attorney General and Cornyn was pressing him to testify about the details of those FALN terrorist commutations. When asked to testify about the options memo, Holder claimed under oath in the congressional record that he was “not authorized” to do so.

Since Clinton had waived such executive privilege, it appears as though — at least according to Cornyn — Obama had asserted executive privilege over the details of that document to protect Holder as he went through confirmation hearings.

Originally Posted By RDak:


I don't know but this sort of thing happening in the past, in similar tyes of circumstances, sometimes caused a war between two countries.

Not that this will remotely happen in this case but that is how countries have sometimes "solved" problems where one country is responsible for the deaths of thousands of another country's citizens.

We let thousands of guns run illegally into Mexico without informing their authorities. Hundreds, if not thousands of Mexicans are dying because of that program.

I would have a very hard time arguing with a Mexican citizen saying this action was akin to an act of war .

I mean, what could I say?

Originally Posted By Jacketch:


So do I and I think more information will come out regarding the death of Jaime Zapata and none of it will be good for Holder or Obama.

Originally Posted By RarestRX:

Good take down of the stupid "Bush did it too!" meme the dems are trying to push:

http://drawandstrike.blogspot.com/2012/06/stupid-new-liberal-talking-point-obamas.html

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QcKzjTd6aws/T-O7BOVWo2I/AAAAAAAAA4k/10sdx6a6oUQ/s640/f+and+f+vs+wide+receiver+fixed.jpg

Originally Posted By Molon-Labe:

Nick Gillespie is the editor of Reason Magazine, too, which is a libertarian publication.

Originally Posted By scottedward58:


If he does this odds are he will use the same scapegoats to blame for all the leaks too.

Originally Posted By Everrest:
Looks like we won't be getting it from him.
CBSNews: W.H.: Ex-staffer can't be questioned on Fast and Furious
More at link.

However, White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler said O'Reilly will not be made available.

"(N)one of these limited communications between Mr. O'Reilly and Mr. Newell revealed the existence of any of the inappropriate investigative tactics at issue in your inquiry, let alone any decision to allow guns to 'walk,'" wrote Ruemmler in a letter to the offices of Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa). Citing Executive Branch confidentiality interests, Ruemmler said, "There is an insufficient basis to support the request to interview Mr. O'Reilly."

Originally Posted By RocketmanOU:


Don't forget that there was an FBI informant in the rip crew who likely got instructions as to where the BP agents were that night. If he was executed, my guess is that it wasn't at the behest of the cartel, even if it was by members of it.

Originally Posted By Jacketch:


Not referring to that incident where agent Terry was killed. It references the death of ICE agent Jaime Zapata by cartel hitmen who also had F&F guns.