If ever there is an example of hyper-partisanship, the recent personal attacks challenging the honesty and competence of Attorney General Eric Holder regarding the ATF's errors in its "Fast and Furious" gun-tracking program should be Exhibit A.
This was a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) program in which guns were allowed to be illegally purchased so that they could be tracked to gun traffickers and Mexican drug cartel leaders. But the ATF, which now is supervised by the Justice Department, lost track of the guns -- which were "allowed to walk," as the parlance goes. Some of the guns were later found at the scene of murders of law enforcement officers.
There is no question that the program was botched -- Eric Holder has called it seriously flawed and immediately established a DOJ Inspector General investigation. But the Republican haste to blame it all on Holder and accuse him of lying to Congress -- even calling for a special prosecutor -- seems to me to be way over the top.
Here are the facts I believe congressional Republicans making these personal attacks on Holder know, or should know.
First, Republican congressional leaders know that this is not the first time this type of ATF gun-tracking program has gone wrong. A similar program with similar problems began under the George W. Bush administration. As CBS News investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson reported, "Operation Wide Receiver" was implemented in 2007 during the tenure of then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. A source told Attkisson that during this program, hundreds of guns "walked" across the Mexican border.
Second, Republicans know Holder was asked a question during a congressional hearing about when he first learned about this program in the context of prior questions concerning the mismanagement of the program. He said he first learned about it -- meaning the problems and faulty tactics -- in the spring of 2011.
Republicans know that the former U.S. attorney for the District of Arizona, the jurisdiction in which ATF was implementing the program, and the former acting director and deputy director of ATF supposedly in charge, have said they also did not know about the problems in Fast and Furious until just recently, and that they had not briefed the attorney general until this year, as he testified.
Third, the Republicans know Holder could not be expected to have remembered a few lines making general reference to this program among hundreds of pages of reports from 24 departments regularly delivered to the office of the attorney general. Even if Holder had read every line of every report -- and Republicans know he didn't and it would be unreasonable to expect an attorney general to do so -- it is a fact that none of the references to the program included any disclosure of the problems and errors in the Fast and Furious program, as Republicans also know.
Fourth, congressional Republicans should recognize that ultimately, this is a law enforcement issue that needs bipartisan support and assistance, not political cheap shots. You would think that conservative Republicans, who are known to emphasize law enforcement, would be providing the ATF and other law enforcement with the maximum number of tools to control and track these guns. These include closing loopholes in laws that facilitate following guns across the border and imposing strict reporting requirements for gun purchases to help combat gun trafficking. Unfortunately, many of those most vocal in criticizing Holder have opposed this legislation.
Americans have become so tired of politicians in Washington politicizing virtually everything.
Mistakes can never be honest. Motives are always questioned. Members of the opposition are not only the subjects of policy disagreements; they must be demonized.
I say respectfully to Republicans responsible for these unfortunate attacks on Eric Holder what I have previously said to Democrats who unfairly personally attacked Bush Attorney General Gonzales:
Enough.
We are all sick of this -- in both parties.
Enough.
# # # #
Mr. Davis is the principal in the Washington D.C. law firm of Lanny J. Davis & Associates, which specializes in strategic crisis management. He served as President Clinton's Special Counsel in 1996-98 and as a member of President Bush's Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board in 2006-07. He is the author of "Scandal: How 'Gotcha' Politics Is Destroying America" (Palgrave Macmillan, 2006). He can be found on Facebook and Twitter (@LannyDavis).
This weekly blog appears in the Hill, the Daily Caller, Foxnews.com, Newsmax.com, the Huffington Post and the Jakarta Globe every Thursday.
Follow Lanny Davis on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@lannydavis
The ATF agents involved in Operation Fast and Furious were PROMOTED - not suspended.
*****
The ATF agents were being promoted - while under an - alleged - Investigation?!
*****
Not over the Top - if you have video evidence of Obama in March 2011 in an interview stating that he only found out about the murder of US Border agent Brian Terry - on the news - and that he had discussions with Holder about it and appointed a Special Investigator.
Then the same people - in the ATF - who would be targets in such an investigation - are PROMOTED - when they should be suspended - as the targets of the investigation - so they do not have access to destory documents and evidence - to obstruct an investigation that might lead to indictments and their prosecution.
Holder should have mentioned in the congressional hearing - in May 2011 - that there was a Special Investigator appointed, that he had spoken to Obama about it, etc. Instead Holder claimed the WH knew nothing about Operation Fast and Furious - and he did not know anything about it - and only found out about it a few weeks earlier.
However, the cold-blooded murder of US Border agent Brian Terry - occurred in December 2010 - with weapons from
1.) HOW MANY innocent people died during the Bush era operation Wide Receiver?
2.) WHAT PERCENTAGE is the latest meme from gun grabbers for number of guns "from unregulated gun shows in Texas" that are siezed in Mexico. Is it 98%? 90%? 76%? Is a new percentage being formulated?
3.) HOW should the Obama Administration, which has made "following international law" a priority, react to the impending extradition request by the Mexican government on Eric Holder as an accessory to murder?
If Republican politicians were honest, ethical and truly moral people as they purport to be - then yes, one would think that. Since their actions speak otherwise... well, the conclusion isn't difficult to draw.
Fine, let's find who was responsible for that one and prosecute them, too.
"and that they had not briefed the attorney general until this year, as he testified. "
As if it's uncommon for underlings to take the fall for higher administrators.
"These include closing loopholes in laws that facilitate following guns across the border and imposing strict reporting requirements for gun purchases"
Quit trying to make this a gun control issue (thereby deflecting from this awful mistake) and stick to the investigation at hand.
I'm no friend of the republican party. Pretty much everything the current party embodies sickens me. But I also don't believe anyone should get a free pass on this one, and if Holder had any knowledge of this, he needs to be forthright.
Actually the former DOJ-DA in Arizona has resigned over this mess and has revealed that the DOJ in fact DID know about the details of "Aghast and Curious". I believe that prior to his resignation, Kenneth Melson testified that the DOJ HAD IN FACT BEEN FULLY BRIEFED! Before he could say any more than that ... the DOJ tucked him away in a nice, new, cushy desk job!
The evidence is SUPREMELY overwhelming (albeit circumstantial to this point) that the DOJ has it's fingerprints ALL OVER THIS.
No wonder cons are so easily duped into believing conspiracy theories about "birth certificates" and "He's a Muslim even if he worships in a Christian church and says he believes in Jesus!"
If all you need is "circumstantial" evidence... sheesh, no wonder we went to war in Iraq based on - overwhelming circumstantial evidence of WMD's (that didn't ever turn up, despite the numerous denials not only by the Iraqis, but by UN weapons inspectors).
Eric Holder is using "plausible deniabilitÂy" and shell games to distract from his obvious complicity in an operation that has the resulted in the deaths of SEVERAL people.
BTW - I didn't and don't support the war in Iraq, or AfghanistaÂn, or anywhere else for that matter. If I recall correctly there was actually enriched uranium, sarin and mustard gas-tipped missles, several dozen jet fighters found buried in the sand, etc. Is that just circumstanÂtial? COLD, HARD EVIDENCE of weapons of mass destructioÂn?
http://arcÂhive.newsmÂax.com/arcÂhives/ic/2Â005/1/13/7Â0852.shtml
http://wwwÂ.spacewar.Âcom/2004/0Â4070120374Â3.9i07uh3mÂ.html
Perhaps this is nit-pickinÂg...but a dozen sarin-tippÂed missiles could cause a GREAT deal of destructioÂn! Sounds like a WMD to me.
And actually when I think about it...there isn't a single assumption up there. Perhaps supposition. Which in my mind is different because supposition requires a weighing of the available facts (for the supposition to be valid anyway). An assumption (about these types of things) is often rooted in naivety, bias or partisanship (as the author of this article suggests). However...I can't believe the amount of support coming from the left for Eric Holder. The man has been tromping all over civil liberties and now is complicit (IMHO) in arming drug cartels.
At the very least he is the most inept DOJ in recent memory and needs to go.
Wow....just wow.
I am let down that the war crimes of Bush & Co. are not being prosecuted. Worse , in a way , is having every reason to believe that we actually have a war criminal on the Supreme Court.
B. It is a specific crime to "out" an operative of the CIA. It is not a specific crime for law enforcement to engage in a sting operation.
Got any more letters?
Second, your implication that Mr Holder meant to say that he was unaware of the specifics of Fast and Furious is wrong, especially since Mr Holder restated in his letter to Congress last week that, "I have no recollection of knowing about Fast and Furious or hearing its name prior to the public controversy about it. Prior to early 2011."
Third, the fact that there were briefing memos about Fast and Furious sent to Mr Holders office may not prove that he read them, but it does make further investigation a reasonable avenue.
Fourth, your implication that government does not have an oversight role over law enforcement is just plain wrong. Law enforcement always has to answer to government, be it a mayor, city counsel, President, or congress.