ATF Project Gunrunner
- Thread starter Al Norris
- Start date
Spats McGee
Administrator
I just finished reading "Project Gunrunner - A Cartel Focused Strategy." Interesting read, but not as damning as I thought it would be. Here are some of the quotes that I find most telling:
Reading between the lines: "We can use this to get more funding."
Again, reading between the lines: "We're going to let guns walk."
Also, someone may have posted this, and I may have missed it, but here's Senator Grassley's 16 May 2011 letter to Eric Holder: http://grassley.senate.gov/judiciar...er-Grassley-to-AG-Holder-QFRs-Follow-Up-2.pdf
Edited to add: Darn it. I tried to upload Grassley's letter, but apparently it's too big.
p. 3
Reading between the lines: "We can use this to get more funding."
p. 18
Again, reading between the lines: "We're going to let guns walk."
Also, someone may have posted this, and I may have missed it, but here's Senator Grassley's 16 May 2011 letter to Eric Holder: http://grassley.senate.gov/judiciar...er-Grassley-to-AG-Holder-QFRs-Follow-Up-2.pdf
Edited to add: Darn it. I tried to upload Grassley's letter, but apparently it's too big.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
Yes, it seemed like this was coordinated strategy and that both the BATF HQ and Mexico City Office (MCO) were aware of it since their advance approval was required before guns could cross the border.
According to this CBS News article, Darren Gill was the lead ATF official in Mexico and I am presuming the "MCO" whose approval would be necessary; but he says he not only said no weapons were to enter Mexico without his approval (email dated Jan 2010), he also claims his first knowledge of Fast and Furious was in early 2010 when he tried to trace firearms recovered by Mexican officials and found he did not have access.
Gill also stated he was told by his supervisor that "the operation was approved even higher than ATF Director Kenneth Melson." Gill also mentions that DoJ's Lanny Breuer visited Mexico and generally referenced a big trafficking case.
So it looks like the suspect in our game of clue is:
1) In a position of higher authority than Acting Director of the ATF, Kenneth Melson
2) Able to declare that MCO cannot have access to things that are supposed to be under the direct supervision of MCO based on this Cartel Strategy document (although it appears that this portion of the report directing Bureau and MCO advance approval was written long after Fast and Furious was already underway and MCO had already figured out something was up).
Here is another good quote from Page 19 of the Cartel Strategy PDF:
Spats McGee
Administrator
Bartholomew,
Yeah, I had actually started typing in a paragraph preceding the one you've quoted about "[mis]identifying military ordnance," but I think that it refers to explosives, at least in large part.
Also, note that:
This tells me that somebody already suspected that FFLs weren't the real problem. I'm also bothered by the "gun shows" reference. Gun shows are nothing more than a collection of FFLs and private individuals, buying and selling. It's not like the gun show itself has anything for sale.
Yeah, I had actually started typing in a paragraph preceding the one you've quoted about "[mis]identifying military ordnance," but I think that it refers to explosives, at least in large part.
Also, note that:
p. 11-12
This tells me that somebody already suspected that FFLs weren't the real problem. I'm also bothered by the "gun shows" reference. Gun shows are nothing more than a collection of FFLs and private individuals, buying and selling. It's not like the gun show itself has anything for sale.
So if they are losing track of a large volume of firearms, and/or those firearms seem to be turning up in criminal hands, that MAY require termination of the investigation, and possibly even the notification of the government of Mexico. I see.
Whose foreign policy is this again?
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
As David Codrea has noted Fox News jumps in with a HUGE accusation... Source
If true, this latest accusation means that ATF went way beyond ordering FFLs to allow questionable sales while they just watched, they actually directly supplied cartels with military grade weaponry not available through FFLs - and then lost track of the weapons.
That seems huge!
On a smaller, unrelated note, the Wall Street Journal gave some cursory coverage to the Fast and Furious program in an article that is otherwise more favorable to the ATF - however, it did have this interesting tidbit:
In other words, all of these guns that are "flowing" to the south, the average time period between these guns being sold by an FFL and recovered in a crime in Mexico is 8-11 years. In other words, practically none of the firearms found in Mexico (with the exception of ATF-sponsored ones apparently) are coming directly from an FFL.
If true, this latest accusation means that ATF went way beyond ordering FFLs to allow questionable sales while they just watched, they actually directly supplied cartels with military grade weaponry not available through FFLs - and then lost track of the weapons.
That seems huge!
On a smaller, unrelated note, the Wall Street Journal gave some cursory coverage to the Fast and Furious program in an article that is otherwise more favorable to the ATF - however, it did have this interesting tidbit:
In other words, all of these guns that are "flowing" to the south, the average time period between these guns being sold by an FFL and recovered in a crime in Mexico is 8-11 years. In other words, practically none of the firearms found in Mexico (with the exception of ATF-sponsored ones apparently) are coming directly from an FFL.
Spats McGee
Administrator
It doesn't just "seem" huge, BR! Your assessment (straw purchasing, supplying cartels with military-grade weaponry, and then losing track of the weapons) seems dead on. Given that they (allegedly) were using government-issued IDs, it may turn out that some of the FFLs were not cooperative at all, but rather were duped.Bartholomew Roberts said:
And the hits just keep on coming!
I am not the sharpest stick in the bunch but this gun trafficking plan has stupid written all over it.
How could you let weapons like that into Mexico knowing you can't stop them from being used and that you will lose track of them. It has beeen proven time and time again that the United States nor any of its law enfocment agencies have any powers south of the border.
I guess we should be thankful that there are plenty of good agents in federal law enforcment that stood against this and have even blown the whistle on it.
How could you let weapons like that into Mexico knowing you can't stop them from being used and that you will lose track of them. It has beeen proven time and time again that the United States nor any of its law enfocment agencies have any powers south of the border.
I guess we should be thankful that there are plenty of good agents in federal law enforcment that stood against this and have even blown the whistle on it.
Senator Grassley (who sits on the Judiciary committee) is now threatening to block all nominations from the current administration until they're more forthcoming with information.
That might backfire on Grassley, but I found this part more interesting:
Two things there - Issa's threat of contempt seems to have gotten at least some response, according to the unnamed aide, and the ranking Democrat on Issa's committee has a pretty darn important question (my emphasis added) that should really not be answered by the Justice Department. The conflict of interest is obvious.
Two things there - Issa's threat of contempt seems to have gotten at least some response, according to the unnamed aide, and the ranking Democrat on Issa's committee has a pretty darn important question (my emphasis added) that should really not be answered by the Justice Department. The conflict of interest is obvious.
Brandon.Glidden
New member
What is your definition of Military equivalent firearms? I dont see Wasser 10's as an equivalent to any US Weapon. Since weapons in the US arsenal are either full auto, or semi auto. I suppose you could say they have one trait in common, and that would be they the semi automatic configuration.
There are many lessons here, the first one is that ATF / BATF / BATFE really is not and never has been on par with the FBI, which leads me to ask, "why create a separate law enforcement agency for 3 special categories of commodities?" The FBI is unable to investigate crimes involving tobacco? For some reason, as good as the FBI is at so many other things, they don't know how to handle crimes involving alcohol? We need a special bureau to handle crimes related to firearms? I would think that the BATFE's continued incompetence is the strongest argument for the dissolution of it and turning over those responsibilities to the FBI.
It would be the equivalent of going to your local police agency to report that your car got stolen and they tell you "Sorry - this is the police agency of kerosene, potatoes and power tools. If your crime doesn't involve those three specific categories - we can't help you." I'm saying the BATFE is not needed.
I know that any organization has “politics”. Any police officer will tell you about “politics” in his or her department. And I imagine the larger the law enforcement organization – the more prevalent politics are. But this is case where a law enforcement agency got so sidetracked by a political agenda, that they strayed from the very mission – their core mission. Individuals in BATFE sold out their agency – agreed to employ the agency in plan to support a political agenda to erode the second amendment rights of citizens of the United States.
From reading the quotes attributed to some of the agents, for those who objected, it really wasn’t about second amendment rights versus gun control – they were concerned that the BATFE had strayed from it’s mission and that the Gun Runner operation was putting lethal weapons in the hands of criminals, and their fear that those weapons would be used to kill federal agents.
This is what happens when a law enforcement agency fails to stay neutral and actively tries to be part of influencing legislation.
Really horrible. Besides proving yet again that BATFE is incompetent, they’ve proved that they are not worthy of the public’ trust.
It would be the equivalent of going to your local police agency to report that your car got stolen and they tell you "Sorry - this is the police agency of kerosene, potatoes and power tools. If your crime doesn't involve those three specific categories - we can't help you." I'm saying the BATFE is not needed.
I know that any organization has “politics”. Any police officer will tell you about “politics” in his or her department. And I imagine the larger the law enforcement organization – the more prevalent politics are. But this is case where a law enforcement agency got so sidetracked by a political agenda, that they strayed from the very mission – their core mission. Individuals in BATFE sold out their agency – agreed to employ the agency in plan to support a political agenda to erode the second amendment rights of citizens of the United States.
From reading the quotes attributed to some of the agents, for those who objected, it really wasn’t about second amendment rights versus gun control – they were concerned that the BATFE had strayed from it’s mission and that the Gun Runner operation was putting lethal weapons in the hands of criminals, and their fear that those weapons would be used to kill federal agents.
This is what happens when a law enforcement agency fails to stay neutral and actively tries to be part of influencing legislation.
Really horrible. Besides proving yet again that BATFE is incompetent, they’ve proved that they are not worthy of the public’ trust.
While I don't disagree with your logic, I think that part of the reason for the current situation is that for most of its history, except a brief period in the 1930's, the ATF has been a division of the Treasury Department rather than the Justice Department. The original purpose of the ATF was to enforce the tax laws on alcohol and tobbacco and they only really became involved in firearms after the GCA of 1968. The ATF has only been a division of the Justice Department since 2002 when they were transferred from the Treasury Department through the Homeland Security Act which was signed by President George W. Bush.
Spats McGee
Administrator
I just finished reading a column on this in the latest American Rifleman. The column brought up something that I hadn't even thought about: How is it that BATFE thinks that international gunrunnning is even within their jurisdiction? Isn't that the job of the Border Patrol?
Edited to add: Given that I'm an attorney, it's a little embarrassing that I didn't even think about jurisdiction.
Edited to add: Given that I'm an attorney, it's a little embarrassing that I didn't even think about jurisdiction.
Many of you all have probably read about two Iraqui refugees being arrested on terrorism related charges in Bowling Green, Ky. Their activities included plans on shipping sniper rifles, grenade launchers, etc. to Iraq. Thei FBI was teh primary investigating authority. A small portion of that story, relevant to this thread, reads:
It appears this is the proper way to investigate and break an international gun running scheme. First, it's the FBI and not the ATF. Second, they made the weapons inoperable before turning them over to the bad guys. You have to wonder where the ATF was when they passed out the law enforcement smarts.
Read more: http://www.kentucky.com/2011/06/01/1758797/two-bowling-green-residents-indicted.html#ixzz1O4KzqkwN
It appears this is the proper way to investigate and break an international gun running scheme. First, it's the FBI and not the ATF. Second, they made the weapons inoperable before turning them over to the bad guys. You have to wonder where the ATF was when they passed out the law enforcement smarts.