WWTBAM Bored

but how can it compare to a dodgy consumer complaint database?

http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/06/issa- ... en-melson/

Ignored subpeonas, documents not delivered to Congress, those same documents denied to a supposedly friendly nation after it's request, and, oh, a dead DEA agent.

This one's been percolating for several months, but rarely gets covered. I think it's got some political ramifications and heads will roll (eventually).

I track it because the Administration and Democratic defense thus far is that it's the "lax" gun laws that enabled this botched operation when it was the failure of the ATFE to enforce the existing laws, not to mention their operation that allowed the guns into bad guys hands and has gotten lots of people killed.

I mentioned Operation Fast and Furious in an earlier thread.

No one even noticed.

Probably deserved its own thread.

Yes- this is absolutely one of the most heinous things the government has done that no one seems to care about.

I've heard about this in the news. It's one of the stupidest law enforcement blunders in years.

That blunder has turned into a political cover-up.

My bet (ok, hope) is that Holder "spends more time with his family" before the 2012 election.

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-atf-g ... ?track=rss

Reporting from Washington— The embattled head of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has told congressional investigators that some Mexican drug cartel figures targeted by his agency in a gun-trafficking investigation were paid informants for the FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration.

So they bought guns from ATF with FBI & DEA money?

jarnon wrote:So they bought guns from ATF with FBI & DEA money?

Yep!

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerst ... rneys.html

Anyone remember the absolute frothing of the mouth generated here and elsewhere when ol' Dubya replaced US Attorneys, which was his perogative as President, as it has been for all other Presidents, and how it is for this current President?

Now it seems one of those Obama US Attorneys is in the thick of this debacle.

Yet nary a peep.

People sure is funny...

Meanwhile

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas ... nd-Furious

According to the Center for Public Integrity in Washington, a public-interest investigative organization that has done extensive reporting on the case, only 10 percent of the 2,000 guns that Fast and Furious allowed to gunrunners to purchase were eventually recovered in Mexico. Close to 30 percent – or 600 guns – were recovered in the US. The remaining 1,200 guns have not been recovered and possibly remain in the hands of drug gangs.

2,000 guns?! You'd think this would be getting more attention. I wonder why not?

You know what's really funny/sad? For the first week after this story finally broke, I learned more about it from The Daily Show than I did from any "legitimate" news source, Fox News included. Grant you, I don't read the Drudge Report or anything, but it is more than a little disheartening to see how low the news divisions have fallen.

What's sad is- we have a thread where someone postulated that impeachment proceedings might result from the debt ceiling wrangling.

When here's something that's WORTH impeaching...or prosecuting...somebody in the Administration, and everyone's quiet about it.

If selling guns to people bent on killing Americans isn't a high crime or misdemeanor at best....and treason at worst...then I don't know what is.

And no...I don't think I'm engaging the hyperbole.

Jeemie wrote:

When here's something that's WORTH impeaching...or prosecuting...somebody in the Administration, and everyone's quiet about it.

Funny how that works nowadays.

You'd think it was some sort of warrantless wiretapping or starting a war or two or some such that seemed to bring a little bit of coverage.

Guess not.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/ ... 5609.shtml

In late 2009, ATF was alerted to suspicious buys at seven gun shops in the Phoenix area. Suspicious because the buyers paid cash, sometimes brought in paper bags. And they purchased classic "weapons of choice" used by Mexican drug traffickers - semi-automatic versions of military type rifles and pistols.

Sources tell CBS News several gun shops wanted to stop the questionable sales, but ATF encouraged them to continue.

http://www.usembassy-mexico.gov/eng/tex ... Trace.html

ATF is deploying its resources strategically on the Southwest Border to deny firearms, the “tools of the trade,” to criminal organizations in Mexico and along the border, and to combat firearms-related violence affecting communities on both sides of the border. In partnership with other U.S. agencies and with the Government of Mexico, ATF refined its Southwest Border strategy.

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-n ... o-honduras


On 21 September, 2010, A. Brian Albritton, United States Attorney for the Middle District of Florida issued a press release on Operation Castaway:

United States Attorney A. Brian Albritton, Virginia O’Brien, Special Agent in Charge of central and northern Florida Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) operations, and Susan McCormick, Special Agent in Charge, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Homeland Security Investigations, Tampa Field Office announce the initial results of Operation Castaway, an intensive and wideranging Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) firearms trafficking investigation conducted by ATF, ICE, the Orange County Sheriff’s Office, the Osceola County Sheriff’s Office, the Brevard County Sheriff’s Office, and the Miami-Dade Police Department. ATF describes Operation Castaway as the most significant firearms trafficking investigation in Central Florida history.



Co

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/bel ... unner-2009

On May 3, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder testified before House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Darrell Issa's committee that he only learned about the government's sale of weapons to Mexican drug cartels "in the last few weeks."

The problem with Holder’s feigned ignorance is that he gave a speech in Cuernavaca, Mexico, on April 2, 2009, in which he boasted about Operation 'Gunrunner” and told Mexican authorities of everything he was doing to insure its success.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/11/new-b ... issa-says/

The Obama administration bolstered sales-reporting requirements Monday for gun dealers in the southern border states of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas.

In a statement defending the administration’s new gun dealer reporting standards in border states, Deputy Attorney General James Cole said, “Federal, state and foreign law enforcement agencies have determined that certain types of semi-automatic rifles — greater than .22 caliber and with the ability to accept a detachable magazine — are highly sought after by dangerous drug trafficking organizations and frequently recovered at violent crime scenes near the Southwest Border.”

Including the ones that killed the DEA agent as allowed by the ATF.

It's rarely the crime or mistake for senior government officials, but almost always the cover-up.


tick, tick, tick...

http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/17/holde ... stigation/

In it, they question a request from Holder for a transcript from a meeting they held in secret on July 4th with Ken Melson, acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Holder apparently told Issa and Grassley he was requesting the transcript for the DOJ and for the Office of the Inspector General — the entity that’s supposed to be distinct enough from Holder’s office to conduct a fair Operation Fast and Furious investigation.

They say “perhaps the most troubling reply” Holder gave them was that the ATF did not have detailed information available on 11 instances ATF admits being aware of that Fast and Furious weapons were recovered inside the United States in “connection with violent crimes.”

Another thing that shouldn't fly under the radar, but it will:

Tom Vilsack, our esteemed Secretary of Agriculture, stated:

I should point out that when you talk about the SNAP program, or the food stamp program, you have to recognize that it's also an economic stimulus. Every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity. If people are able to buy a little bit more in the grocery store, then someone has got to stock it, shelve it, package it, process it, ship it. All of those are jobs. It's the most direct stimulus you can get into the economy during tough times.

He is representative of the lack of basic intelligence that is rampant in this administration, and in the press corps that let that go unquestioned. We need to replace these jackasses before they do even more harm to our country.

He, (and the so called 'experts' that have come to his defense) fail to point out that while every dollar spent (granted for argument's sake) generates $1.84 in the economy, every dollar doled out in the SNAP program was probably at least $2.00 taken from someone else who earned it. They always seem to leave out that part. First you have to take the dollar from the person who earned it, then you have to pay for the IRS bureaucracy that is set up to take the money from the person who earned it, then you have to pay for the beaurocracy set up to determine who to redistribute that money to, then you have to pay for the time and materials it takes to process that money into a form in which it can be redristibuted. And I'm sure there are other looters in the loop.

To say that Food Stamps is a stimulus is the same thing as saying that the looting that occurred in Britain was a stimulus because it created jobs in rebuilding the property that was destroyed, and in replacing all the goods that were stolen. This would be funny if it weren't so scary. This is right out of Ayn Rand.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:He, (and the so called 'experts' that have come to his defense) fail to point out that while every dollar spent (granted for argument's sake) generates $1.84 in the economy, every dollar doled out in the SNAP program was probably at least $2.00 taken from someone else who earned it. They always seem to leave out that part.

And, as usual Flock, you miss the point. Proponents of trickle down economics have claimed for years that you can stimulate the economy by giving tax cuts to the well-off and that they will then recirculate that money into the economy. It never works. Even George Bush, Sr., knew it didn't work. Companies right now are sitting on tons of money and they are doing literally that, sitting on it earning virtually no interest rather than investing it in things that can stimulate the economy. People are also paying off debt, which while admirable, does not create jobs.

A dollar's worth of food stamps actually gets spent and it buys food and that money goes to grocers and farmers.

silverscreenselect wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:He, (and the so called 'experts' that have come to his defense) fail to point out that while every dollar spent (granted for argument's sake) generates $1.84 in the economy, every dollar doled out in the SNAP program was probably at least $2.00 taken from someone else who earned it. They always seem to leave out that part.

And, as usual Flock, you miss the point. Proponents of trickle down economics have claimed for years that you can stimulate the economy by giving tax cuts to the well-off and that they will then recirculate that money into the economy. It never works. Even George Bush, Sr., knew it didn't work. Companies right now are sitting on tons of money and they are doing literally that, sitting on it earning virtually no interest rather than investing it in things that can stimulate the economy. People are also paying off debt, which while admirable, does not create jobs.

A dollar's worth of food stamps actually gets spent and it buys food and that money goes to grocers and farmers.

Proponents of trickle down economics have claimed for years that you can stimulate the economy by giving tax cuts to the well-off and that they will then recirculate that money into the economy.

It has worked every time it's been tried. It works a whole lot better than Obama's stimulus plan did. He no sooner takes credit for the grand deal (sell out) that Congress passed then he announces more ways to spend more money we don't have before anything has been cut. I'll bet his big September plan includes another stimulus plan to spend even more trillions of dollars we don't have. To him (and you) dollars are like Tostitos. If you run out, we'll just make more.

A dollar's worth of food stamps actually gets spent and it buys food and that money goes to grocers and farmers.

Like everyone else of your mindset, you conveniently ignore the part about taking the money away from the people that earned it. You believe that the government owns all capital, and they know how to spend it better than the person that earned it or created it. That's called Communism, and it has failed miserably and tragically every time it's been tried.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:It has worked every time it's been tried.

No it hasn't.

The only time it might have been said to "work" was when john F. Kennedy did it.

But his tax cut plan, while it did lower the top marginal rate from 91% to 70%, was more of a broad-based tax cut program aimed at...you guessed it...CONSUMERS.

It was a demand-side tax cut, not a supply-side cut.

Reagan's tax cuts did not work. Cuts on the highest marginal rates actually started under...GASP...JIMMY CARTER...but the economy was still as sluggish as hell.

No- it was good old monetary policy under Paul Volcker that got the economy moving again after the Recession of 1981-2.

And if you're going to sit here ten years later, knowing what we know now about the mirage that was the 2000s economy, and claim Bush's tax cuts "worked", then...well...there's no reasoning with you.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: Like everyone else of your mindset, you conveniently ignore the part about taking the money away from the people that earned it. You believe that the government owns all capital, and they know how to spend it better than the person that earned it or created it. That's called Communism, and it has failed miserably and tragically every time it's been tried.

Uh, flock....

PLEASE tell me that you don't believe the only people who receive food stamps are people who are taking something away from "people who earned it" and never worked in their lives.

I know several people who are currently receiving food stamps. I have known a couple of them for more than 40 years.

Every single one of them are people who began working when they were young -- some part-time in high school, some right out of high school. They worked continuously until their mid-to-late 50s.

Social Security and Medicare -- programs they had been paying into since there were 16 years old -- that was one thing.

Food stamps, that's another matter entirely.

None of them ever expected to be in the position of needing food stamps. Or any other kind of help. But they do now.

I find it inconceivable that you wouldn't believe that there are people who need the safety net who aren't free-loading sponging welfare queen bums.

Jeemie wrote: The only time it might have been said to "work" was when john F. Kennedy did it.

And of course the massive amounts of spending Johnson started under the Great Society and Vietnam had nothing to do with it either.

mellytu74 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote: Like everyone else of your mindset, you conveniently ignore the part about taking the money away from the people that earned it. You believe that the government owns all capital, and they know how to spend it better than the person that earned it or created it. That's called Communism, and it has failed miserably and tragically every time it's been tried.

Uh, flock....

PLEASE tell me that you don't believe the only people who receive food stamps are people who are taking something away from "people who earned it" and never worked in their lives.

I know several people who are currently receiving food stamps. I have known a couple of them for more than 40 years.

Every single one of them are people who began working when they were young -- some part-time in high school, some right out of high school. They worked continuously until their mid-to-late 50s.

Social Security and Medicare -- programs they had been paying into since there were 16 years old -- that was one thing.

Food stamps, that's another matter entirely.

None of them ever expected to be in the position of needing food stamps. Or any other kind of help. But they do now.

I find it inconceivable that you wouldn't believe that there are people who need the safety net who aren't free-loading sponging welfare queen bums.

I have not made any value judgements on anyone who is receiving food stamps. But EVERYONE who is receiving food stamps is taking money away from someone else. That's just a fact. And to think that the food stamp program is a stimulus to the economy as a whole is insanity. The best stimulus is to get the government out of the free market and get everyone back to work again so that no one is on food stamps.

I'm sorry Melly, but the only person on this bored who has even written the words 'welfare queeen' is SSS. Not me. But your post is a good example of the problem in micro. Any time someone talks about a problem and proposes a solution to that problem, along comes the accusations that they are uncompassionate and mean spirited. I wrote about the Secreatry of Agriculture leaving out where the money comes from. I said nothing about the recipients of the program. But your post basically says that I have no compassion for your friends. Where did that come from? You can think that if you want, but I think it is the government bureaucracy that is uncompassionate and mean spirited, because they feed on the dependency as a way to get votes and keep themselves in power.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: The best stimulus is to get the government out of the free market and get everyone back to work again so that no one is on food stamps.

As long as American companies, when left to their own devices, ship jobs overseas willy nilly to third world countries and American management, when left to its own devices, punishes employees for their mistakes with layoffs and cutbacks, we won't ever get everyone back to work in jobs in which people can actually support their families.

Your own company is a prime example Flock. Through management greed or ineptitude, 180 people lost their jobs. And don't go blaming the govenrment for ethanol subsidies. Your employer knew the risk and either didn't know how to deal with it or gambled that they could get away with it. In either event, they were wrong and 180 people lost their jobs.

Getting government out of the free market leads to reckless, stupid corporate behavior for which all of us pay the price.

silverscreenselect wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote: The best stimulus is to get the government out of the free market and get everyone back to work again so that no one is on food stamps.

As long as American companies, when left to their own devices, ship jobs overseas willy nilly to third world countries and American management, when left to its own devices, punishes employees for their mistakes with layoffs and cutbacks, we won't ever get everyone back to work in jobs in which people can actually support their families.

Your own company is a prime example Flock. Through management greed or ineptitude, 180 people lost their jobs. And don't go blaming the govenrment for ethanol subsidies. Your employer knew the risk and either didn't know how to deal with it or gambled that they could get away with it. In either event, they were wrong and 180 people lost their jobs.

Getting government out of the free market leads to reckless, stupid corporate behavior for which all of us pay the price.

I could think of stronger words, but I will go with "Bite me". You don't know shit. All the frickin companies that have had to let go people in the past three years are greedy and inept in your stupid opinion? We're at 10% unemployment by the inaccurate method that it's calculated and distributed but nearly 20% in real unemployment and all you have is canned, stereotyped insults? Now the main stream, state controlled media is even starting to talk about inflation, so you know it's getting to be serious. You need to get your head out of your ass, buddy.

silverscreenselect wrote:Your own company is a prime example Flock. Through management greed or ineptitude, 180 people lost their jobs. And don't go blaming the govenrment for ethanol subsidies. Your employer knew the risk and either didn't know how to deal with it or gambled that they could get away with it. In either event, they were wrong and 180 people lost their jobs.

Getting government out of the free market leads to reckless, stupid corporate behavior for which all of us pay the price.

Woah! Just had a big case of deja vu. Didn't you already eat that foot awhile back?

Yeah, looks like you burped it up and are eating it again.

Meanwhile, back in the "a US DOJ entity allowed, even encouraged, illegal activity that killed at least one US Border Patrol agent and a whole bunch of Mexicans" department:

http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2011/0 ... t-furious/*

DEA head Michele M. Leonhart admitted in a letter to Senator Grassley (Judiciary) and Rep. Issa (Oversight) that her organization was in fact involved in the investigation, and provided support for it.

So ATF, a component of DOJ, and the DEA, also a component of DOJ, did all this without senior DOJ knowledge and/or supervision?

A multi-agency operation of the DOJ and nobody in the chain of command knew about it?

Incompetence or obstruction? Either way, this can't end well.

*admittedly, this is from a blog, but "fact of" the DEA letter is not in question, so my disbelief in the DOJ's assertion that nobody in the AG's office knew of this operation stands.

Alberto Gonzales fires some US attornies for the President, as is his perogative and as was done by both Clinton and Obama, and it's non-stop media coverage and commentary here.

Here, a DOJ-sponsered operation actually killed people and.....crickets.