[luke warm]

hard to believe we haven't talked about this... given the media's lack of coverage i guess it's not that big a surprise... there are many links on this, so i tried to find one from far away from the action... i got this one from england

[hrothgar]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-22, 15:28, said:

hard to believe we haven't talked about this... given the media's lack of coverage i guess it's not that big a surprise...

Both the Diane Rehms Show and On Point covered this with 45 minute broadcasts in the last week...

[Bbradley62]

CNN and Fox News have both been all over it. We really needed to see the 40 members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee take their party-line vote?

[luke warm]

 hrothgar, on 2012-June-22, 15:42, said:

Both the Diane Rehms Show and On Point covered this with 45 minute broadcasts in the last week...

in the last week eh? not bad, since it's been going on for far longer... in any case, unless this also has just happened in the last week, i was speaking more about abc, cbs, and nbc

 Bbradley62, on 2012-June-22, 16:15, said:

CNN and Fox News have both been all over it. We really needed to see the 40 members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee take their party-line vote?

guess i'll watch more cable since network news seems to be falling down on the job

[PassedOut]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-23, 07:07, said:

guess i'll watch more cable since network news seems to be falling down on the job

Seems to me the newspapers have been covering it a lot, in both the news and opinion sections. I can't recall anyone maintaining that the operation brought credit on either the Bush or Obama administrations.

At issue right now is election year politics: GOP witch hunt for Eric Holder reflects bigger problem

Quote

In 2006, when George W. Bush was president, federal law enforcement officials came up with a spectacularly dumb idea: Allow powerful firearms purchased in the United States to “walk” across the Mexican border, where authorities would trace the weapons and eventually nab the big-time criminals who supply guns to the ultra-violent Mexican drug cartels.

It is no surprise that most of the weapons promptly disappeared.

But the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), undeterred by failure, went back to the “gun-walking” technique again the following year — and used it once more in 2009, after President Obama had taken office, in the tragic fiasco known as “Operation Fast and Furious.”

...

Congress has not only the right but also the duty to investigate how such a bad idea as gun-walking was conceived and executed over five years — and to make sure nothing of the sort happens again. The problem is that Issa isn’t interested in the truth. He just wants to score political points.

Issa’s focus isn’t on the operation itself. It’s on what Holder and Justice Department officials did or did not say last year when questions were first raised.

What Issa wants to do is manufacture something that can be portrayed as a high-level Obama administration cover-up. The problem is: A cover-up of what? Holder has acknowledged that the operation, of which he says he was unaware, was wrong. He has provided documents showing how wrong the operation was, and why. He has taken responsibility for the whole thing, because he is the boss.

Surely it is crazy to allow the sale of AK-47s and .50-caliber sniper rifles to anyone outside of the military or the police, let alone to drug cartels. And I say that as a man who has owned and used firearms since my dad taught me how to use them safely when I was eleven years old.

But let's focus on how to prevent the government from repeating this kind of stupidity -- preferably by banning such sales in the first place.

[hrothgar]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-23, 07:07, said:

in the last week eh? not bad, since it's been going on for far longer... in any case, unless this also has just happened in the last week, i was speaking more about abc, cbs, and nbc

NPR has been covering this for quite some time...
I simply used this as an example since I had listened to both podcast the previous morning.

FWIW, I've also seen this discussed on either Meet the Press or Face the Nation (though not in depth)

Speaking of which, I think that Issa is on Meet the Press tomorrow.

[luke warm]

the reps supposedly want emails and other docs sent by doj after the february 2011 letter (the one holder had to retract)... it's hard to understand why they'd want all these, but it's even harder to understand why holder balked about supplying them... and then to have obama exert exec privilege to keep them out of issa's hands *really* boggles the mind, especially given the fact that the prez said he was never privy to any communication about f & f... this has the potential to be a very dangerous time, for both the reps and dems... in the meantime, a border agent has died as a result of this and the family wants answers

 PassedOut, on 2012-June-23, 07:52, said:

At issue right now is election year politics: GOP witch hunt for Eric Holder reflects bigger problem

there seems to be a pretty big difference, as far as bias is concerned, between this article and the one i supplied... for example, most know by now the differences between f & f and what was done during the bush years (operation wide receiver)... f & f signified a big change in policy and in tactics... there are many articles showing the differences between the two, but basically: in owr, there were something like 400 guns involved, all (supposedly) with tracking devices... also, owr was done in concert with the mexican gov't... well over a thousand arrests were made as a result of owr...

the program was shut down nearly 2 years before f & f was implemented... f & f involved over 2,000 guns, of which two had tracking devices (with 40 hour batter lives)... the mexican gov't was not informed... no significant arrests were made

one thing people want to know is, what was the purpose of f & f, since nothing of significance seems to have been accomplished

[PassedOut]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-24, 07:38, said:

there seems to be a pretty big difference, as far as bias is concerned, between this article and the one i supplied... for example, most know by now the differences between f & f and what was done during the bush years (operation wide receiver)... f & f signified a big change in policy and in tactics... there are many articles showing the differences between the two, but basically: in owr, there were something like 400 guns involved, all (supposedly) with tracking devices... also, owr was done in concert with the mexican gov't... well over a thousand arrests were made as a result of owr...

Yes, the bias of the two opinion pieces is in opposite directions. It's always a good idea to look at the facts to see which comes closer to the mark: ATF gunwalking scandal

Quote

The first known ATF "gunwalking" operation to Mexican drug cartels, named Operation Wide Receiver, began in early 2006 and ran into late 2007. Licensed dealer Mike Detty informed the ATF of a suspicious gun purchase that took place in February 2006 in Tucson, Arizona. In March he was hired as a confidential informant working with the ATF's Tucson office, part of their Phoenix, Arizona field division. With the use of surveillance equipment, ATF agents monitored additional sales by Detty to straw purchasers. With assurance from ATF "that Mexican officials would be conducting surveillance or interdictions when guns got to the other side of the border", Detty would sell a total of about 450 guns during the operation. These included AR-15s, semi-automatic AK-pattern rifles, and Colt .38s. The vast majority of the guns were eventually lost as they moved into Mexico.

At the time, under the Bush administration Department of Justice (DOJ), no arrests or indictments were made. After President Barack Obama took office in 2009, the DOJ reviewed Wide Receiver and found that guns had been allowed into the hands of suspected gun traffickers. Indictments began in 2010, over three years after Wide Receiver concluded. As of October 4, 2011, nine people had been charged with making false statements in acquisition of firearms and illicit transfer, shipment or delivery of firearms. As of November, charges against one defendant had been dropped; five of them had pled guilty, and one had been sentenced to one year and one day in prison. Two of them remained fugitives.

Another, smaller probe occurred in 2007 under the same ATF Phoenix field division. It began when the ATF identified Mexican suspects who bought weapons from a Phoenix gun shop over a span of several months. The probe ultimately involved over 200 guns, a dozen of which were lost in Mexico. On September 27, 2007, ATF agents saw the original suspects buying weapons at the same store and followed them toward the Mexican border. The ATF informed the Mexican government when the suspects successfully crossed the border, but Mexican law enforcement were unable to track them.

Fast and furious was truly a disastrously foolish operation, as were the gun-walking operations during the Bush years. No doubt the failure of the operations during the Bush years were -- in the minds of gung-ho ATF officers like William Newell -- due precisely to coordination with a Mexican government infiltrated by the drug cartels. Hence the change, however ill-advised.

[hrothgar]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-24, 07:38, said:

it's hard to understand why they'd want all these, but it's even harder to understand why holder balked about supplying them... and then to have obama exert exec privilege to keep them out of issa's hands *really* boggles the mind, especially given the fact that the prez said he was never privy to any communication about f & f...

What so surprising about the administration not wanting to cooperate with Darrell Issa?
One way or another, the wanker is going to hold hearings.
Might as well stonewall him from the get go.

Moreover, arguably the administration will benefit from continual hearings etc because

1. This is a distraction from the economy
2. It brings back memories of the impeachment idiocy
3. It will help rally the base

Quote

one thing people want to know is, what was the purpose of f & f, since nothing of significance seems to have been accomplished

How do you propose to use the success of the program to infer the motivation behind it?
FWIW, I don't think that anyone would argue that the program was well run...

[Flem72]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-24, 07:38, said:

the reps supposedly want emails and other docs sent by doj after the february 2011 letter (the one holder had to retract)... it's hard to understand why they'd want all these, but it's even harder to understand why holder balked about supplying them... and then to have obama exert exec privilege to keep them out of issa's hands *really* boggles the mind, especially given the fact that the prez said he was never privy to any communication about f & f... this has the potential to be a very dangerous time, for both the reps and dems

Many have said the ongoing subpoena/exec. priv. issue is 'clearly just political' since the dates of the withheld docs are after Feb 4, 2011, the date the investigation began and the administration shut down the F&F program. But the issue should be familiar to anyone who watched or has researched Watergate: They are looking for the coverup, not the primary operations info.

[luke warm]

 hrothgar, on 2012-June-24, 10:02, said:

...the administration will benefit from continual hearings etc because

1. This is a distraction from the economy
2. It brings back memories of the impeachment idiocy
3. It will help rally the base

all true, at least in the short term... of those 3, i believe #1 is the most damaging

 Flem72, on 2012-June-24, 13:28, said:

But the issue should be familiar to anyone who watched or has researched Watergate: They are looking for the coverup, not the primary operations info.

i think you're right... it's not the original idiocy that seals the deal, it's the cover-up... i still think this holds a lot of potential danger for obmam... and for the reps also, for reasons richard stated, if they aren't careful

 PassedOut, on 2012-June-24, 09:18, said:

Yes, the bias of the two opinion pieces is in opposite directions. It's always a good idea to look at the facts to see which comes closer to the mark: ATF gunwalking scandal

rarely is it a good idea to look at wiki for objective truths... fwiw, i didn't view the telegraph's article as necessarily biased

[PassedOut]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-24, 15:02, said:

rarely is it a good idea to look at wiki for objective truths... fwiw, i didn't view the telegraph's article as necessarily biased

The Fast and Furious scandal has been covered extensively the past few months, and the wiki account squares pretty closely with those reports. Note the 80+ links to source material.

Do you have a more objective reference for your claim that Operation Wide Receiver produced "well over a thousand arrests?" I'd like to see it.

[hrothgar]

 PassedOut, on 2012-June-24, 15:51, said:

The Fast and Furious scandal has been covered extensively the past few months, and the wiki account squares pretty closely with those reports.

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias"

[cherdano]

One some level this is kind of amusing.

1. I didn't know you could be charged for holding congress in contempt - I mean, aren't 90% of all Americans guilty of that?

2. It's really fun to see Republicans up in arms over gun control. I mean, if you had just prevented those gun sales, the shootings in which they were used might not have happened. Right? Right??

3. It was obvious material for a nicely done
Colbert report episode.

It seem fairly normal to let smaller guys get away with smaller crimes in order to get the big guys. The sort of crimes that you can't really prevent, and you know someone in the gang would be able to do that. Seems to me "buy a gun in Southern US and smuggle it across the border" pretty much falls into that category... Obviously, the implementation seems to have been rather horrible, but still the outcry might be a bit out of proportion.

[hrothgar]

 cherdano, on 2012-June-25, 03:59, said:

2. It's really fun to see Republicans up in arms over gun control. I mean, if you had just prevented those gun sales, the shootings in which they were used might not have happened. Right? Right??

That's what the liberals want you to think...

The whole point of Fast and Furious was to justify restricting our rights to shoot people.

[cherdano]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-24, 15:02, said:

fwiw, i didn't view the telegraph's article as necessarily biased

And Fox News is fair and balanced, right?

I mean, did you actually read the article?
Hint: including a jab at the target completely unrelated to the topic of the article is could be considered a hint for bias: "... jobs (because Obama is oh so very good at generating those)"
Hint: an article that uses "the Prez" instead of the president is perhaps not even trying to appear unbiased
Hint: comparing a standard law enforcement strategy, taken out of proportion and handled incompetently, to the biggest scandal in US politics, could also be a hint of bias

Maybe you could try to get out of your small set of news sources (and the few selective links they provide to outside sources on the occasion someone agrees with them) to rediscover what "unbiased" means.

[luke warm]

 PassedOut, on 2012-June-24, 15:51, said:

Do you have a more objective reference for your claim that Operation Wide Receiver produced "well over a thousand arrests?" I'd like to see it.

i guess it depends... probably none you'd call objective... anyway, from fbi.org

"Project Gunrunner has resulted in approximately 650 cases by ATF, in which more than 1,400 defendants were referred for prosecution in federal and state courts and more than 12,000 firearms were involved."

[PassedOut]

 luke warm, on 2012-June-25, 04:10, said:

i guess it depends... probably none you'd call objective... anyway, from fbi.org

"Project Gunrunner has resulted in approximately 650 cases by ATF, in which more than 1,400 defendants were referred for prosecution in federal and state courts and more than 12,000 firearms were involved."

As you know, the link you gave here in no way supports your claim that Operation Wide Receiver produced "well over one thousand arrests." It's ludicrous to imagine that 450 guns -- almost all of them lost track of in Mexico -- would produce so many arrests. And in fact, Operation Wide Receiver produced only 9 arrests (all of them after Bush left office) and only 6 convictions to date. You can check that from many sources.

Using your logic you could also say that Fast and Furious produced thousands of arrests.

[blackshoe]

 cherdano, on 2012-June-25, 04:09, said:

And Fox News is fair and balanced, right?

Of course.

 cherdano, on 2012-June-25, 04:09, said:

Hint: comparing a standard law enforcement strategy, taken out of proportion and handled incompetently, to the biggest scandal in US politics, could also be a hint of bias.

Bigger than Teapot Dome?

Quote

Wikipedia: Before the Watergate scandal, Teapot Dome was regarded as the "greatest and most sensational scandal in the history of American politics".

I think my local weather guesser is usually fair and balanced, at least when reporting on the weather. Beyond that, I don't trust anybody in the news business.

This list is interesting. It's kind of sobering to see it all in one place.The question seems to be not "what's the biggest scandal?" but "What's the scandal this week?"

[kenberg]

From time to time I read a bit about Fast and Furious.My lack of detailed knowledge is probably more from disinterest than from lack of coverage.

I suppose that, as the passive voice expression says, mistakes were made. I really know nothing about Mexican drug gangs, gun running, sting operations, etc. I am not that much interested in making a study of it, and I am pretty certain that I could not come to a reliable assessment of blame here unless I wanted to put in much more effort than I care to. When an operation blows up, certainly you can expect everyone to blame everyone except themselves. From what I have gathered, however, the Republican onslaught cannot remotely be described as an intention to unearth what really happened or what new legislation is needed. For starters, we are dfealing with the party that has announced that denying Obama re-election is the most important, and perhaps the only important, item on their agenda. They have made it clear they really don't give a flying whatever about anything else.