ATF Project Gunrunner

GC70, I agree that, indeed, testimony can be compelled from a witness under the statutes under use/derivative use immunity. However,i in none of the cases cited was the DoJ/IC in active opposition to the grant. In fact, if I am not mistaken, it is the Justice Department's own attorneys which draft and execute the documents. So, hypothetically, what happens if the DoJ refuses to play along? Do we have another Marbury v. Madison where an agency's ministerial vs. discretionary acts must be elucidated and the ministerial act (as understood by the court) compelled?

One other complicating factor also comes to mind. No federal actor has the authority to grant any sort of immunity, use or otherwise, for testimony given which might self-incriminate on a state crime. A grant of immunity might thus be required from the various states attorneys. I see this being litigated furiously on multiple fronts, all with the primary goal of delaying all proceedings by every means available.

Does anyone here REALLY think Cunningham is anxious to roll over on Breuer and/or Holder and the only thing holding him back is fear of prosecution by his current employer (DOJ)? Didn't think so.
 
It does not matter whether it is state-to-federal or federal-to-state, the same Fifth Amendment protection is applied in use and derivative use immunity, regardless of the source of the immunity. (Murphy v. Waterfront Comm'n - 378 U.S. 52 (1964)).

At any rate, I would imagine that Obama might not want to create a full-blown constitutional crisis and loose the support of his party in Congress. History has shown that members of Congress support the power and authority of their branch of government when challenged by the executive branch.

-------------------------

I want to hear Cunningham testify!
 
Last edited:
Alloy post 1845. I don't know about "compelled" but I do know of two Phonix Gun shops who reported Straw purchase attempts while the buyers were in their stores.

They were directed by the ATF to sell the guns to the individuals. They asked for faxed authorizations. One MAY have recieved authority he did not give me a straight answer but he seemed to be holding out. Neither made the sale.

They both indicated that they had provided the personal information of the purchasers to the ATF.

With regard to Congress compelling to testify. No one has mentioned G. Gordon Liddy. As I recall Liddy refused to be sworn. He served time but not from his testimony to Congress. His stay in the Federal Penal System is legendary. He was allowed to prosecute a Prison Warden and won a conviction for corruption.

Does anyone know what happened when he refused to be sworn. This could be germain to the discussion.
 
Last edited:
Now I'm curious. What would happen when you are being sworn in and when they say ".....and nothing but the truth, so help you God"... and you say No?
I know they wouldn't put you on the witness stand, but what would be the next step?
If you are the accused you can plead the 5th. Even as a witness you can take the 5th. But what if you simply don't promise not to lie?

Rick
 
Now I'm curious. What would happen when you are being sworn in and when they say ".....and nothing but the truth, so help you God"... and you say No?
I know they wouldn't put you on the witness stand, but what would be the next step?
If you are the accused you can plead the 5th. Even as a witness you can take the 5th. But what if you simply don't promise not to lie?
Click to expand...

An oath, apparently, is just a formality. It means nothing if the person swearing
the oath has no honor. Look at Congress, they all swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. If they all did as they promised, how far apart could they be?

On the other hand, it's against the law to lie to the FBI, why not the same thing for lying to Congress?
 
Last edited:
It is against the law to lie to Congress.

Look at the baseball steroids scandal. Some of the players have put themselves in legal jeopardy via perjury to Congress.
 
I mean what happens (what's the next step) if you don't swear to tell the truth? Not that "I will lie", but I won't swear not to.

Rick
 
It is against the law to lie to Congress.

Look at the baseball steroids scandal. Some of the players have put themselves in legal jeopardy via perjury to Congress.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with you, but why aren't Bernanke, Geithner, Corzine, ad nauseam, in jail? Is Congress more concerned with some minor drug crimes than the destruction of the world economy? It says a lot about our "justice" system!
 
Last edited:
I mean what happens (what's the next step) if you don't swear to tell the truth? Not that "I will lie", but I won't swear not to.
Click to expand...

Contempt of Congress? Jail time for contempt? Probably, the rule is "Go ahead and lie, just don't say you are going to lie". That seems to be the way it works in the rest of the system.
 
Alloy post 1845. I don't know about "compelled" but I do know of two Phonix Gun shops who reported Straw purchase attempts while the buyers were in their stores.~ltc444
Click to expand...

Doing a comparison between your local news and what you or I might see on the national...uhhhh....media, is AZ proceeding with a serious investigation?

I guess what I'm asking, is what I'm seeing on the tube just a national election media show, or is AZ proper and Arizonians really hot under the collar about this?
 
Monty Wilkinson e-mail seems to indicate that he alerted AG on Dec 15
Click to expand...

Interesting. Then on the 17th the Washington Post does a story burning the cooperating FFLs using confidential trace data that is illegal for the ATF to release to a newspaper under the Tiarht Amendment.
 
If RICO laws fit then every agent and supervisor all the way up who did not stop this illegal activity needs to be prosecuted... those that complained and tried to complain should get a pass those who acted to ignore the obvious need some serious prision time including the executive ultimately responsible at the top.
 
Hmmm, apparently Dennis Burke, the supervisor of Cunningham, Morrisey, and Hurley and the only person in the whole scandal to actually go off the government payroll as a result of this, was also a driving force in drafting the legislation for the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. Source: http://tucsoncitizen.com/arizona-news/2012/01/28/burke-of-fast-and-furious-had-anti-gun-history/

Hmmm, what do you think the odds of that coincidence are?

And by the way, NPR has a link to the emails: http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2012/01/DOJdocs.pdf

In it Monty Wilkinson states he is briefing the AG and tells Dennis Burke "Please provide any additional details as they become available to you." Burke received an email later that afternoon informing him that two of the guns recovered at the murder scene were related to Fast and Furious. So we know Burke knows about Fast and Furious, we know Wilkinson told him to provide any additional information, and we know Wilkinson is briefing the AG.

Sounds like AG Holder is really going to enjoy his next round of testimony in front of Congress.
 
Does anyone here REALLY think Cunningham is anxious to roll over on Breuer
Click to expand...

He might not have to. On February 2nd, we have records of a meeting in which Breuer was involved:

AAG Breuer suggested allowing straw purchasers [to] cross into Mexico so SSP can arrest and PGR can prosecute and convict.
Click to expand...

On February 8th, BATFE Acting Director Kenneth Melson also discussed the possibility:

Melson and the Ambassador discussed the possibility of allowing weapons to pass from the US to Mexico and US law enforcement coordinating with SSP and PGR to arrest and prosecute the arms trafficker. I raised the issue that there is an inherent risk in allowing weapons to pass from the US to Mexico; the possibility of the GoM not seizing the weapons; and the weapons being used to commit a crime in Mexico.
Click to expand...
 
Just a minor point but Monty Wilkenson said:

I’ve alerted the AG, the Acting DAG, Lisa, etc.”
Click to expand...

Not that he would alert the AG but that he already had.

I'm sure they're going to ask Holder about this. I think Holder is so focused now on just avoiding a perjury charge that he'll say something stupid like "I can't recall", or maybe it was one of those e-mails or memos that he never happened to read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top